E3 2011: Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 Updated Preview

E3 2011: We go up periscope with land and sea combat in Modern Warfare 3.

E3 2011: Where previously Microsoft eased into its press conference with some of its lower priority titles--saving its big guns for the finale--today was all about high-profile games straight out of the gates. Despite getting our first look at Modern Warfare 3 in action mere weeks ago, Activision was back to showcase more of its billion-dollar-selling first-person shooter franchise.

The demo of mission Hunter Killer opened under the sea with us firmly attached to a personal submersible device. After using a torch to cut through some grating, we snaked through an underwater tunnel laden with tiled walls and trucks with still-running taillights. How long they had been under there remains a mystery. Our mission was to locate and then plant a mine on an enemy submarine.

Teammate Frost called for us to watch the sonar gauge mounted on the front of our undersea ride, and moments later, we were doing the dance of avoidance as we slid and weaved through undersea mines. Earth and debris sank from above, slowly floating through the murky water. A giant red blip hit our sonar and our target; a huge looming ship, hovered above. We went silent, powering down our meager vehicle, holding position as two giant spinning propellers made their way past us. There was no risk of being caught in its wake, and we casually moved forward, using the now familiar X press to attach a huge explosive package to its rear fins. We blew the bomb, fled the scene of the crime, and watched as the sub sank gracefully toward the seabed below before resurfacing.

We left the dark depths of the ocean and slipped into something a little drier. We ditched our mask and fins and made a seamless transition from scuba gear to combat fatigues. Donning a firearm and shooting our way up the incline of the side of the vessel with a fellow squad member, Sandman played out a war classic. Opening a sealed airlock hatch, we cooked and then dropped a live grenade onto the unsuspecting suckers in the cabin below. Once inside, we cleared each room, navigated the narrow hallways with the odd melee strike, and introduced our boot to the bad guy's skull for good measure.

The demo skipped forward for brevity, and it was clear that the crew had been alerted to our presence as red lights flashed and sirens sounded, which echoed through the chambers of the sub. With the jig up and subtlety no longer an option, we loaded a door with an explosive charge. Then we breached the room and used the familiar slow motion found in previous games to sight our targets and gun down a half-dozen sailors in one fell swoop. Looting their corpses, we located the missile command keys we were looking for, turning keys simultaneously and smacking an ominous big red button, as well as receiving a 30-second warning on the impending launch.

Back in the open air, jets flew overhead, the sky was filled with plumes of smoke, and a crumbling city dotted the horizon. A small rubber dinghy waited for us, and not wanting to get caught up in the carnage, we cut a path through the choppy ocean; missile pods opening menacingly on the side of the submarine.

Our objective then was to follow the leader, and we darted and weaved between warships under fire; rockets whizzed overhead, majestic liners went to watery graves, and the deck of a fallen aircraft carrier played a makeshift ramp as the raft banked itself on dry land temporarily to shoot down chasing enemy combatants.

Mission completed and crew intact, we zoomed into the rear of a waiting extraction helicopter and took to the air. Below us, spanning vistas showed a city in despair and giant gaping wounds were visible in skyscrapers; jets and choppers scrambled through the clouds.

This latest look at Modern Warfare 3 follows the same formula we saw in our first look at the game--a mix of stealth and all-out combat. CoD fans after additional details on Call of Duty: Elite, Activision's upcoming subscription service that will tie heavily to the multiplayer component of MW3, will have to wait a little longer, with no new information provided. The game is due out on all major platforms on November 8 this year.

Written By

Want the latest news about Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3?

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3

Follow

Discussion

187 comments
AlabamaFan92
AlabamaFan92

I just can not wait for the same boring and campy multiplayer for a third straight year! They really don't have to try to make it better when their average fan base is 12! OVERRATED SINCE AFTER WORLD AT WAR xD

MEDzZ3RO
MEDzZ3RO

@PooyaOstadpour Good guess, even if I do say so myself. Aaaahh the clash of the fps titans, Battlefield 3 or Modern Warfare 3? That's the question. The way I see it, Modern Warfare 3 will have more console sales and overall sales but Battlefield 3 will no doubt gain larger support from the PC community and strong sales on the consoles (more then Bad Company 2). Call Of Duty has gained a lot of success (in recent years) through being very accessible, almost anyone can play it. The potential audience is massive. Battlefield on the other hand has always portrayed itself as being the squad based shooter, the game in itself has a steeper learning curb and in turn doesn't have the accessibility Call Of Duty offers. In terms of critically reception, I think Battlefield 3 may have the edge on the basis that so far, Modern Warfare 3 doesn't seem to have improved that much upon the foundation laid by Modern Warfare 3. My guess is BF3: 90-94%, MW3: 87%-91% based on overall combined review scores (Metacritic, Gamerankings..etc..). It should be an interesting one, Call Of Duty hasn't had a multiplatform threat like this since it became a worldwide hit. In the coming years I can see Battlefield becoming as big as Call Of Duty. Time will tell. Unless you haven't guessed already, I'm more of a Battlefield 3 man.

PooyaOstadpour
PooyaOstadpour

@MEDzZ3RO I recently bought a PS3, but I'm majorly a PC gamer, although following the games on every platform. OK let's not continue the argument regarding mw2 graphics as obviously we have NOT the same view on it. But as about Tryarch and IW, I think as long as Zampella and his team were working in IW, the even games were a lot better than odd games due to graphics and specially AI in which COD5 was a disaster! But Tryarch always tries to introduce something new in the franchise and that's what I like about them. I think we've spammed enough on this comment section; Let's move back to the topic and talk about MW3. Actually, I like your views on games, even if they're not somehow fare and same as mine, but let me ask, what do you think of the battle between MW3 and BF3? in stores I mean. Cos technically, I think we can't blame people loving things that we think they're rubbish, you know.

MEDzZ3RO
MEDzZ3RO

@PooyaOstadpour I don't think you're a teenager, I didn't mean my statement to be interpreted that way. I know you're not talking about MW3 but I was, I was talking about the franchise in general since CoD 4. Graphically speaking the PC version was worse then CoD 4 on PC. Crysis, Killzone 2, Metal Gear Solid 4 and Uncharted 2 were out in (or before) 2009 and look a lot better. Bad Company 2 and Medal Of Honor were out the following year and again looked superior. The graphics admittedly weren't terrible but they weren't great either, hence why I used mediocre to describe it. Graphics don't make the game but it's something I've heard the game praised for multiple times. Bizarrely enough, although not a huge fan I prefer Treyarchs entries in the series to Infinity Wards (excluding CoD 3). They seem to focus more on balancing the multiplayer and improving servers (locale search, dedicated servers on PC) more then Infinity Ward do. Not to mention they've taken care of the Nintendo community with ports over the past few years (including CoD 4) and introduced the best Co op a game's seen in years. I'll watch the review a bit later. I have to ask, what is your platform of choice to play games? I'll hazard a guess at PC gamer who's transitioned to consoles this generation?

PooyaOstadpour
PooyaOstadpour

@MEDzZ3RO I agree. Is it not the 10th time I said that MW3 from what we've seen on E3 is just a disappointment? So in this case at least, we share the same opinion. But let's be honest. I don't say CODMW2 is great because someone else has indoctrinated me in it. Nor am I a teenager. I say it because I really enjoyed this game. It's not fare to say that the graphics were mediocre! It was not. Now that you've seen Killzone 3 and crysis 2, you say mw2 graphics is below average (which is still arguable). The online multiplayer regarding all issues about the non dedicated servers is even now one the most fps online competitive games beeing played. Give it another try and think again about the Ai. For the nth time, I'm not talking about mw3, how can I tell you that? I'm talking about the game that had been released in December 2009 and that game was magnificent. You want a fare review, go and watch mw2 review on www.gametrailers.com.

MEDzZ3RO
MEDzZ3RO

@PooyaOstadpour I've yet to notice any change whatsoever in the CoD Ai, it appears unchanged. Call Of Duty was ahead of its time in 2007 but it's fallen behind, put Modern Warfare 3 next to Battlefield 3 and you should see it. MW3 could easily be pass off as MW2 DLC, where's the improvement? You're quoting from Wikipedia now.... we all know how accurate their information has been in the past.... There's no point continuing this discussion, it's highly susceptible to opinion and you're clearly still indoctrinated by the Call Of Duty hype, which is fine. Just don't expect me to be playing any of the Infinity Ward games any time soon; all they care about is the cash hence why we haven't seen the CoD formula change after five games. I'll stick to Battlefield, Killzone and Resistance if you don't mind. I'd like you to know, I'm not having a go at you personally. It saddens me that so many "gamers" (mainly children and teenagers) call CoD the pinnacle of fps gaming and that reviewers seem to use a different reviewing criteria. They'll pick up upon the flaws in one game but they don't in CoD, even if the reviewer is identical. It just comes across as incredibly biased.

MEDzZ3RO
MEDzZ3RO

@PooyaOstadpour I've been talking about the CoD franchise in general, not just one game. Put MW2 next to CoD 4, does that not seem a tad odd? Where's the improvement? Servers are still poor, the game is severely unbalanced online, the story is filled with cliche after cliche, graphics are mediocre (compare the PC versions of the game), still filled with glitches...etc... the list goes on. Are you looking at the same game when you're praising the visuals? They don't even compare to the likes of Crysis, Uncharted or God Of War. They played it safe, Call Of Duty was the game of the moment then, giving it a low score would no doubt damage their reputation. Hype sells. I've played all the Call Of Duty games on Veteran, all of them have been a doddle with the exception of World At War largely because of grenade spamming. Call Of Duty isn't a difficult game. I'm talking about the engine in all the CoD games from CoD 2 onwards (excluding CoD 3), they've all used what is essentially the same engine. They've modded it sure but the engine is dated, Infinity Ward should have built an entirely new engine this time around but they haven't. They've just modded their old one, there's only so much you can do if you're base engine is based on such old tech. Do some more research you should find it.

PooyaOstadpour
PooyaOstadpour

@MEDzZ3RO About the AI, let's hear it from the Wikipedia: The game utilizes the in-house IW 4.0 game engine, which is claimed to be a generation beyond the capabilities of the engine used in Call of Duty 4.Although proprietary, it is based on an unspecified id Tech engine, and can accommodate larger worlds, enhanced graphic detail, and more efficient rendering Infinity Ward has addressed the issue of enemies that continually respawn at different points of a level. The developer demonstrated that the game engine uses a "dynamic AI", which has replaced the infinite respawn system and allows enemies to act more independently. These "smarter" enemies are designed to actively seek out and drive the player forward through a level, and can break away from set behaviors such as following a designated route in order to attack. The player cannot depend on enemies to be found in the same locations as a previous play-through because enemies will behave differently each time a level is played.

PooyaOstadpour
PooyaOstadpour

@MEDzZ3RO With respect to your opinion, It's not nice of you judging my scores. But let me clear something up. CODMW2 has got a 9 from Thunderbolt, 9.4 from Gamezone, 9.5 from both Gamervision and IGN, 9.9 from gamechronicles, 10 from VideoGamer and it was the Game of Year in Gametrailers.com. Therefore "how's anyone supposed to take that seriously?", there you got your answer. MW2 had a great multiplayer, meticulously detailed graphics and a shocking campaign. So why not a 10? It's the 2nd best selling game EVER. Now go look at the scores for both Killzone and Battlefield (which are both great, but not that much comparing to COD franchise) and there you find the truth. Have you ever tried a COD game on veteran difficulty? I doubt it. Because if you did, you'd see for sure how the enemy reacts and how should an AI be designed. Let's not write here like no one else is reading it. What did you mean by "Call Of Duty has had its day, the engine is atleast 4 years old, the unmodified version may date back to the Call Of Duty 2 era making it 6 years old."? in 2009 the engine was 2 years old and the game had the same detailed graphics as Uncharted 2. We are not talking about MW3, as for that, I am really disappointed of what I saw in E3 2k11.

MEDzZ3RO
MEDzZ3RO

@PooyaOstadpour You've given Modern Warfare 2 a 10, how's anyone supposed to take that seriously? I can see where you're coming from with CoD 4, alongside the likes of Fall Of Man, it showed how online multiplayer should be done on a console. It's changed the genre. Modern Warfare 2 however didn't, it was a downgrade from CoD 4, it wasn't years ahead of its rivals this time and it was made too casual friendly, why should someone be rewarded for dying (deathstreaks). Even most of the diehard CoD fans feel the same way. MW2 had a better campaign though. I may be wrong buy you come across as particularly Infinity Ward biased. Call Of Duty has had its day, the engine is atleast 4 years old, the unmodified version may date back to the Call Of Duty 2 era making it 6 years old. Battlefield 3, Killzone 3, Resistance 3...etc.. have closed the gap, look what they've done in their games from 2008-now compared to CoD. The change is massive. The hype will die down, yearly installments are ridiculous. Halo's not my thing but it has almost always been ahead of the CoD franchise in terms of content. I personally find the gameplay too retro but a lot of people see that as part of the appeal.

MEDzZ3RO
MEDzZ3RO

@PooyaOstadpour Graphics are nice but Killzone 3 has more then just that..., the campaign's alright but it's not an fps particularly focused on that area like the likes of Crysis. I can't complain too much about the team AI in either games, both are far from perfect and the CoD side don't seem to actually shoot anything. As for enemy AI I standby what I said originally, There isn't much artificial intelligence with the CoD AI, bump the difficulty up and they don't become smarter, instead they get hundreds of grenades with superhuman reflexes and accuracy. They still stand in the open to shoot you if they've seen you. The Killzone AI will move about, take cover (for the most part) and they do play differently when you bump the difficulty up or restart a checkpoint. They change their positions according to the location of you, your partner and the other helghast. It's not the same over and over like it is in CoD. As for the helghast rushing in, Capture troopers do this all the time, they are the "melee helghast".

PooyaOstadpour
PooyaOstadpour

@MEDzZ3RO Actually, I've just played Killzone 3 campaign. I think the developers only worried about the graphics! I can't say bad AI, nor can I say it was good. The enemy stay too often in the open, don't see you when you're right under their nose (in the battle), and rush to you for an easy and worthless death. COD AI was way better than this. Now that I've tried it, I can definitely say that.

MEDzZ3RO
MEDzZ3RO

@PooyaOstadpour I agree too. I'm waiting to see what Respawn do, especially now EA is at the helm rather then Activision.

PooyaOstadpour
PooyaOstadpour

@MEDzZ3RO Yeah, that was me. Actually I was talking about PC games. But I agree with your statement; from what I saw in MW3 Stage Demo, this game is years behind his rivals. But at 2009 (MW2), the story was just the opposite. I'm really eager to see what would Respawn have for us, as being disappointed of what Infinity Wards wants to offer.

MEDzZ3RO
MEDzZ3RO

@PooyaOstadpour I never said Killzone was the reason CoD AI was bad? It was stated that Call Of Duty had the best AI in any fps one person had seen (may have been you, I don't know). It was also stated they can't comment how it compares with Killzone and Halo having not played them. I merely responded to confirm Killzone does indeed have better enemy AI then that found in CoD. "simple as that". It has to be said though as far as shooters go, don't you think CoD is going down the pan when compared to it's rivals?

PooyaOstadpour
PooyaOstadpour

@MEDzZ3RO I haven't touched Killzone (maybe I will in summer), but if we assume that you're right and Killzone AI is great, then what? Is it reason that COD AI is awful?? Maybe Killzone AI is better, which I doubt as I watched 2 40 min game-play trailers here at GameSpot and to me it didn't have anything special compared to COD, but you can't deny the AI in CODMW2. The fact is, ok A is better than B, but that doesn't mean that B is bull****. Simple as that.

madg23
madg23

I always do love the stealth missions.

MrOnage
MrOnage

@MEDzZ3RO i still think infinity ward makes better cod games then treyarch, but i've seen mw3 footage and there was almost zero improvement, so i don't know if infinty ward is gonna make something of it. i just hope they improve much on the multiplayer.

johnofwar
johnofwar

Yeah, it's getting to a downhill situation. But come on, they repeated it twice in a bad form. But do you have to get mad at the entire franchise?

MEDzZ3RO
MEDzZ3RO

@johnofwar Wrong, I like multiple other games but that's not why I hate the Call Of Duty Franchise. Over the last four years it's broken no new ground whatsoever yet constantly seems to get a lot of hype in the industry. Problems from the original such as poor servers haven't been fixed after nearly ten years of the franchise. They've become lazy because they no longer feel the need to up their game, they know it will sell so they won't take risks that may dent sales. Call Of Duty was always an alright FPS (although the differences between the original and the second weren't that great either) but we can all see the direction they're taking with it and it doesn't look bright.

johnofwar
johnofwar

@MEDzZ3RO So you say you hate Call of Duty because... You like another game? Heh... Just because it does the same thing over and over again twice? You hate the entire franchise because of that two mistakes? As you can see, Mr. I love every game except Call of Duty, Call of Duty had been switching their developers, from Infinity Ward, to Gray Matter Interactive, Amaze Entertainment, Treyarch, Pi Studios and Aspyr Media, after that Infinity Ward and Treyarch just repeat itself. So you can't blame every other Call of Duty for repeating alot until Modern Warfare 2. And since the CoD franchise has turned to a yearly kind of game, the new engine might take a while, I, myself think that they are making a new engine right now. But I am saying that as I do not know, not as I know.

MEDzZ3RO
MEDzZ3RO

@PooyaOstadpour PC lacks a lot of great shooters these days. Call Of Dutys AI is laughable compared with the enemy AI in games like Killzone 3. As for cinematics and voice acting, Killzone 3 takes it again. I can't comment on Halo, I've not played it since Halo 2. I honestly don't know if you've been playing the same CoD I have but I found the enemy AI poor in the lot of them. What impressed you??

MEDzZ3RO
MEDzZ3RO

@MrOnage Treyarch's games seem to have far more textures though, the differences are few and far between. Either way, the series as a whole falls well short of what's expected by todays standards. You only have to compare any of their games to Battlefield 3, Crysis 2, Medal Of Honor and Killzone 3 to see the CoD franchise is pretty much at the bottom in-terms of graphics and servers of triple A FPS titles. Modern Warfare 3 looks a joke, it will be a joke of a game. In 2 years since Modern Warfare 2 they've improved next to nothing aside from a few new guns and gimmicks.

MrOnage
MrOnage

@MEDzZ3RO then treyarch needs to look better at infinity ward, cuz the animations of the soldiers in black ops were really bad. and the game was boring.

trivolution
trivolution

Guys, no fighting here. Justin Bieber is the true enemy.

trivolution
trivolution

Guys, no fighting here. Justin Bieber is the true enemy.

Moloch121
Moloch121

Battlefield 3 Battlelog 'nuff said. I can't believe you all still enjoy the same game over and over where is the innovation where is the graphics update, where is the tactical feel?

shockersousa
shockersousa

sounds like a good game. though personally i think battlefield will be better I guess we will have to wait and see O-O

K-E316
K-E316

@TevoxZi Telling people to just "shut the hell up" will only make things worse. Not sure you're going to ignore this message since you didn't ignore the last one. Next time you want to respond to someone, don't try to be a smartass. Now I'm done talking...

TevoxZi
TevoxZi

@K-E316 FYI. What I said in the very beginning was that people are all entitled to their own opinions AND you were generalizing your opinion, not simply just expressing it. Now please, shut the hell up. I'll ignore just in case, I don't feel like talking to one who can't even read previous messages.

K-E316
K-E316

@Tevoxzi Trying to be the mature one now? You shouldn't have responded to my comment in the first place. Afterall, people have opinions right? :roll:

PooyaOstadpour
PooyaOstadpour

But comparing to BF2, although a great game, never come near what even COD4 had done in 2007! I mean, ok great graphics. But when it comes to story telling and innovation, there's just nothing to be amazed of. And just look how the 4 characters in BF2 talked together at the same time like complete morons! OR in the real-time cinematics which you couldn't even move! but just moving around the mouse. And you can never blame COD AI. It has far more complicated AI than BF. I'm not talking about the treyarch but about Infinity Ward which have done an amazing job programing that AI. I haven't touched Kill Zone, nor Halo, but I can say No PC games is comparable with COD when it comes to first person shooting.

PooyaOstadpour
PooyaOstadpour

I can't disagree with the fact that the even parts of the COD made by IW are pretty much the same game with same graphic engine, a new story and some innovations for online playing. And I agree that Treyarch tries to do this game in a different way and with some new ideas and probably (I'm not sure) with it's own engine. But I also can't deny the fact that I really enjoyed playing COD 4 & 6 and was really amazed with the variety of missions and the surprising story. specially in CODMW2. If the graphics were the same, frankly I didn't realize that and my mind had just blown away seeing how picturesque was the game. Actually viewing the Gametrailers video review, I heard them said that the only game that had the same graphics in detail was Uncharted 2! So even if they used the same graphics, they've done a great job polishing the game so beautifully. Adding to this the fact that I didn't enjoy COD 5 & 7 as much the even ones. Although BO had a great story, the game-play was being repetitive to me. The Theater mode was/is a great add to the game. But pretty much every other thing was a copy of what IW had done in its previous game. So to me, the IW COD is more welcomed than the Treyarch. to be continued...

luneth77
luneth77

@loriya I'm no fanboy, and am truly interested in Battlefield 3, but what kind of huge gameplay innovation does it give compared to all other shooters? (Graphics are pretty sweet though.) It's true that CoD gameplay is pretty much exactly the same with each installment, but that does not make the games bad in itself. In fact, the modern warfare games both have some of the highest average review scores of any FPS games, including Battlefield 2. Of course if you're bored with the formula, then you're bored with the formula, but for people like me who aren't spent on modern warfare gameplay, then there's no real reason why MW3 won't be as good as previous installments, (especially black ops, which has a joke for multiplayer.) Like I said before, BF3 and MW3 simply have different play styles, and gamers will choose accordingly.

MEDzZ3RO
MEDzZ3RO

@MrOnage Wrong. All they both are are heavily modded IW engine (one used in CoD4); strip it back to the basics and it is the same engine hence why I said "essentially". Believe it or not, the same engine was used as far back as 2005 with Call Of Duty 2, obviously in its original form. CoD 3 didn't use this engine, everything else after CoD 2 has. @DITHRICH Don't pity me by any means. I'm quick at typing and will often back myself up with solid facts. You can't state something without doing so if you want it to hold any credibility.

Ioriya
Ioriya

@DITHRICH That's because we need to enlighten people like you about why CoD is such a worthless franchise nowadays. But sadly, it will never get through. We try though, right?

Ioriya
Ioriya

@luneth77 I guess you were not paying attention to much of the trailer, because you were in denial. Correct? Also, this argument... "BF3 focuses on large, strategic gameplay, while CoD is a smaller and faster paced game with an arcade type feel." It's one of the most old and overused arguments to try to legitimize CoD and say it isn't a bad game.The main issue that most people have with this game, is that the Developers of the CoD franchise are literally milking the franchise for its former glory achieved by CoD1. The most they do with CoD per yearly release is give it a rename, reskin it, throw in a sorry excuse for a story, add some achievements and possible throw in a few gimmicks such as breakable windows just to say they added something to the engine of the game. Its never a big leap when it comes to improvements and they charge full price for a rehash.

Ioriya
Ioriya

@arbelaster Well no, I'd just know its a gimmick by Infinity Ward. By now anyone would know a FPS made by Infinity Ward and published by Activision is just a renamed CoD with reskins. They're already done this like... what? 10 times? So by now a rename wouldnt even save this mess of a game.

DITHRICH
DITHRICH

@MEDzZ3RO you realy are bored if you wrote all of that to just say cod games are alike and diffrent then BF games.........

HitmanMatu
HitmanMatu

i can guess the story and ending story: soap and price do stuff together they have some friends who will die later in the game or at the ending oh and there are some other squad, but they will all die or one of them survives ending: all soap and price new friends and teammates die almost in the end or at the ending of the game and soap and price survive together and the bad guy will be killed by soap and price is injured !!!!!! oh and they will make another cool character and will kill him in the end or close to end!!!! there be happy i saved youre money now :) (info taken from previous MW games )

MrOnage
MrOnage

@MEDzZ3RO Not all the CoD games since CoD 4 ran on the same engine, CoD 5 and CoD 7 ran on different engines made by treyarch.

MEDzZ3RO
MEDzZ3RO

@INewIRave CoD 4 and Modern Warfare 2 are near identical with two exceptions, tweaked graphics and all around a worse game; more "noob " friendly. You have to remember all the CoD games since CoD 4 have essentially ran on the same engine so aside from aesthetic changes the game is essentially the same. It was a winning formula 4 years ago but it's too dated now, it's the only major fps (aswell as Halo) that still has terrible online servers: Battlefield, Killzone and Resistance don't. They *had* one of the best fps games in existence. Treyarch were patching their World At War a hell of a lot more then IW ever patched CoD 4; the jumping in rock glitches on CoD 4 are still there as are all the readily accessible hacked lobbies. Treyarch take more risks, Call Of Duty 3, World At War and Black Ops are very different games whilst CoD 4, MW2 and MW3 are near identical. Treyarch added vehicles, co op, zombie mode, theatre mode and arguably the best story campaign the franchise has ever seen. It was certainly different. You tell me who's done more for the CoD franchise lately if you consider the only things IW have introduced have been perks and killstreaks (back in CoD 4 I'd like to add). Since, we've had nothing but extensions upon those ideas for the worse, why should you get rewarded for dying (playing badly) is beyond me. As a franchise it is dying for hardcore fans, it's becoming a kids playground year after year. Don't believe me?, compare Bad Company with CoD 4, you can clearly see in terms of game play and visuals CoD 4 had it. Now compare Bad Company 2 with Modern Warfare 2, you can clearly see Bad Company 2 has superior visuals and game play is pretty much on a par with BC2 coming out on top in my opinion. Now Modern Warfare 3 (which seems to have had no advancement in 2 years since Modern Warfare 2) with Battlefield 3; Battlefield 3 literally looks a generation ahead now.

Adema83
Adema83

@Phil-teh-Pirate No but i owned MW and WaW but they didn't have rip off DLC and i only own Black Ops because it was gifted to me on steam and i refuse to buy the DLC for it and have only played it for 67 hours before i got bored, and for MW2 you could not give that pile of s*&$ to me.

INewIRave
INewIRave

@MEDzZ3RO Firstly if you think mw2 was anything like cod4 i am amazed. It felt completely different just because the core mechanics are the same doesnt mean its the same game in mw2 the graphics were clearly updated, the sound was updated though idk what that has to do with anything, the multiplayer had a lot of work done which didnt work in a lot of ways but it was nevertheless a different experience as is the case in single player. The core mechanics stay the same because its a winning formula, they add new things and they update in all areas which they can. It is not going to change a lot because that would be stupid as they already have one of the best fps in existence why do anything other than update it? Treyarch never update they add small gimmicks and as far as removing glitches hack etc well you have to learn that there are different types of glitches and hacks and so on and so forth which can be discovered and take time to fix. By the time treyarch got making CODBO they knew what to look for.

TevoxZi
TevoxZi

@K-E316 Oh really? To be honest, you're acting the same way. (Infact, most of the time I end up being the one correct.) Once again, generalizing your opinion is very narrowminded. Prove my point and show me that you're one of those people who can't stand being the last commenter because it makes you feel worse yourself, knowing you: You'll attempt to backfire it, but trust me, it won't work. Regardless, I'll ignore your ignorant ass now. Get this: People have varying opinions. Too much for you? Too bad.

JihadJoe
JihadJoe

This is the same **** as previous games. I mean, they are still using the same 7+ year old Quake III Arena engine ffs! The models still look like crap, the weapons feel like toy guns, and the gameplay still the same as it was back when COD was released. Activision are more than happy to sit back and keep pumping out these horribad sequels every year instead of actually doing what a developer should do, work on original IPs, innovate on existing IPs and try to push the envelope on graphics, physics, sound and gameplay. The original CoD was an amazing experience back in the day, but by now It is tiresome, repetitive and plain BORING. The sad thing is the sheep are happy to throw money at these clowns so they don't feel inclined to actually work and develop new things. Thank god for developers like Dice who actually want to move the industry forward, isntead of stagnating for the sake of maximum profits.

luneth77
luneth77

Everybody's complaining that the MW3 trailer was bad because it showed "nothing new", but I was actually more dissapointed with the Battlefield 3 trailer. It was just a 10 minute tank demo that didn't seem like anything I hadn't seen before in previous battlefield / bad company games. I was also thankful that MW3 looked Exactly like MW2, instead of the plastic Black Ops look. Battlefield 3 does look like a good game, with incredibly realistic visuals to boot, but I don't think you can really compare BF3 and MW3 because they are different experiences. BF3 focuses on large, strategic gameplay, while CoD is a smaller and faster paced game with an arcade type feel. Personally, for online play I prefer smaller team games such as Halo and Call of Duty, and I think that players who think likewise will get MW3, while fans of large-scale strategic matches will get BF3.

Phil-teh-Pirate
Phil-teh-Pirate

@Adema83 Fanboy cash cows? Are you going to deny that you haven't bought / owned MW, MW2, Black Ops and WaW then?