(This is about Modern Warfare 3, not MechWarrior!)
But seriously, MW3 looks just the same as MW2, except for the new maps, and "new" guns. Most of the guns are imported directly from previous CoD titles (throwing knife again, really?). I don't see why this whole game, which took what, 1-1.5 years to make is a game of it's own when it could most likely just be another DLC for the "meager" price of 20euros. No noticable engine upgrades, no new stuff (don't come bitching with "There are new perks/weapons/maps derp!" because it's not new, it's old, really old), and in my opinion, just another bad game in the CoD series. If you disagree, or if you're a CoD fanboy and you think I'm being a retard and then you post something along the lines of "this is a fcking awezome game you noob" I will ban you from this blog (if you're not an admin, because they are un-bannable from this blog TT).
Try to keep potential discussions civilized ? Thank you <3
(This is not a rant about MW3/2, it's me trying to create a discussion on why people would buy a game that is so similiar to it's prequel)
People like games where they can just jump in with little or no knowledge or skill and just have a bit of fun. thats why angry birds and sc2 are so popular, and its the same with MW3. Why should random gamer #10 learn how to fly a jet or work with a team in a game like BF3 when they can herp derp around with their super fast reloading guns firing at 6 bazillion shots per second and get nukes man
On December 10 2011 22:17 Kiante wrote: People like games where they can just jump in with little or no knowledge or skill and just have a bit of fun. thats why angry birds and sc2 are so popular, and its the same with MW3. Why should random gamer #10 learn how to fly a jet or work with a team in a game like BF3 when they can herp derp around with their super fast reloading guns firing at 6 bazillion shots per second and get nukes man
NUKES
I like how you brought something in that people could interpret as an SC2 bash.. Really creative.
Well, but essentially you nailed it. MW3 takes nothing to play, you just buy it, press play and shoot. Thats what most gamers want and since 3 > 2 they will buy it because it's newer, because you never want old games. Whether these new games are really new or not is not the important point, because they don't look at real gameplay anyway, or at least not to the level that they could tell the differences.
I didnt really want to play it after mw2, but then did have the curiosity. I spoke to some of my friends and found out that it's worse than mw2 and almost like an on the rails shooter or something, apparently it's as fun watching or playing, cause it's mostly about million gun sounds/explosions around, as opposed to you doing stuff.
I was not into the multiplayer aspect of it so dont know much about that. I think in general most of the "big" games are starting to feel pretty boring to me. I've been looking at some more indy stuff and stuff you find on psn, and it seems a lot more interesting. /oldergamerrant
It's easy to pick up, fun for most people and stress free (at least for me =P). After playing a bunch of games that require a bunch of thought and time put into it(SC2, Dark Souls....), its fun for me to play one that's easy and dumb down. That's why I play COD games ^_^
As for why people buy MW3 when its pretty much the same game repackaged, it's because everyone else bought it and they don't want to feel left out.
On December 10 2011 22:24 KeksX wrote: I like how you brought something in that people could interpret as an SC2 bash.. Really creative.
?
SC2 is a pick up and play game. No commitments. And with the ladder matchmaking and 1v1 system, you don't really have to worry about learning the metagame.
Social experience, at least in my opinion. Playing MW2/3 by myself is so boring but chatting with a couple of friends while playing is a good way to kill a few hours. Also, its a really fast-paced game and not much teamwork is necessary, so you can live out your Rambo dreams And yeah people say its a "repackaged" game and so on, which it is but it is pretty cost-efficient. I think I've sunk more than 100+ hours into MW2 and for $60, its not a bad deal. Few games provide 100+ hours of gameplay.
I agree a lot with op. Why release a map pack when you can just call it a new game, move some stuff around and charge full price? It's pathetic. I'm not wasting my money on it.
dont get me wrong, i'm not bashing MW3 or SC2 or angry birds. i enjoy some of them when i'm in the mood. often its hard to really bring up the mental energy to play a "harder" game and I just wanna relax. Thats why MW3 is so successful. no mental commitment needed, its fully relaxation instead of a challenge.
My brother and I bought MW3 for the sole reason of the special ops missions. We always enjoy specialized co-op games and the special ops missions in the previous game were a rare diamond hidden in shit. 3 Spec op missions into MW3 it became bloody obvious next to no effort were put into them. Just going by that I find the entire game a glorified map pack
I could go on about many things, but I think I will keep it short this time. Yes it definitely has it's problems and could be better but it's not like there are many alternatives. It's still an addicting game and until something else comes myself and others will keep playing this game because there isn't anything else that's like it. And pls don't say BF because it's a totally different multiplayer type.
Honestly I'm pretty glad they didn't change much. Way too often game designing crews attempt to change everything and make it super new and cool and they end up ruining the game. Glad they didn't change much.
On December 10 2011 22:24 KeksX wrote: I like how you brought something in that people could interpret as an SC2 bash.. Really creative.
?
SC2 is a pick up and play game. No commitments. And with the ladder matchmaking and 1v1 system, you don't really have to worry about learning the metagame.
I was refering to the "like SC2 and angry birds" thing. I said it COULD be interpreted as an SC2 bash, not that it actually is one
@Kiante: I know, really, I just wanted to point out how your wording in that case could sound for some people!
Seems like they are testing waters with it to see how much they can net with just marketing and brand name, with minimal effort on the actual product. I guess it's cool and hip to have the latest version of popular name.
I buy it because I really enjoyed mw2 (aside from the lag), the guns were fun, handled well, and the engine was pretty crisp. The mw series is a blast if you enjoy that kind of mindless generic-plot madness with some cool settings and a plethora of bad guys. The single player might not justify the price by itself, but the multiplayer adds enough replayability to the package that it'd be worth around $30 in my mind. The spec ops missions are freaking awesome, can play those for a very long time, fun fun challenge modes with endless hordes of enemy troops that carry around bombs strapped to their chests, like zombie mode except without the zombies and boards.
Needed to know what the fuck happend to soap and the fact that half of my class is basicly gonna buy it soo if i wanna do something i can go and play with them.
I felt like playing a shooter -- haven't really played a FPS since Halo 2 on my roommate's XBox. I played about 5 or 10 minutes of MW2 at a friend's house, saw him play it a fair bit, it looked fun, so I was looking stuff up on BO, MW3, and BF3. This was in like October or so, before MW3 and BF3 had come out. I was more interested in something with a modern setting, and since a new CoD was coming I decided to pass on BO. Since I'm playing on PS3, MW3 seemed like the better choice -- the big selling points of BF3 seemed to be bigger maps with more people and using vehicles, but you can't have 64 player games on console, so it just seems like it'd be better on PC. Plus the gameplay of MW3 appealed to me more -- I like the perks and killstreaks and general fast pace.
Everyone complains about MW3 just being a copy of MW2, but since I've never really played CoD I don't care about that. I bought it on release day here in Japan, and so far I've actually been really happy with it. The campaign was alright, some exciting / fun moments, and despite how much I suck I've really been enjoying the multiplayer. I was getting my ass kicked hard for quite a while; half way through my first prestige now and starting to get a bit better, got comfortable with my loadouts, starting to dig my way out of my negative k/d balance. Instead of just running around aimlessly and not caring if I die or not, I've been trying to actually get better and die less, and I'm still enjoying it a lot.
Would I buy a MW4 next winter? I don't know, it depends what they change and add. Normally I probably wouldn't, but it would depend on what else is out, what I feel like playing, and whether I'm employed and have the money to burn. I realize that Activision is totally milking the series for money. They don't need to release a marginally better version each year, but they do because it makes a shit load of money. Eh, that's just how the world works. If I want the product, I'll buy it, if I don't, I won't. Despite all the (imo ridiculously out of proportion) MW3 hate going around the internet, I've actually been really happy with my purchase so far.
Don't get me wrong, I love CoD but this, this isn't really a new game but more like a minimal expansion pack, if even that.
Lol, I find the responses to that video even more hilarious. Serious lack of sarcasm detection.
Also, Activision milking a franchise for all it's worth? They wouldn't do that Afaik, the creators of MW got fired from IW after they were done with MW2 and they took most of their talent with them to form a new studion (Respawn Entertainment). IW is not going to make anything new ever.
The game I thought was really god for what it was. It had the double looped straps for the special ops guys like they all do so they can switch to they're pistol without dropping the main gun like they do in real life. the double set up of having 2 scopes on the gun and tilting it so that you can use either the red dot sight or a full zoomed scope was really really cool and I loved it. It added a lot of fun to combat. The story was beautifully executed again and with a few exceptions it was very very well written I think.
Don't buy into the bandwagon of hate on it. Its a very very well made game and deserves all the money that it makes. granted trayarch makes better multiplayer games but at the very least its the same concepts that have been used in all fps games and it really doesn't make why people want to bash a successful and well made game.
I really loved CoD4, That game was just amazing in my opinion that one and CoD2 so naturally I was excited when I saw CoD:MW2! I was like hell fucking yeah! But the more I played it the worse it got, The multiplayer was just terrible. I still played it on my brothers name as it wasn't worth renewing my Xbox live to play. So after that game I had lost all hope in CoD series.
Then BAM no time later! CoD:BO! Hmm looks decent, I wouldn't mind attempting it but I'm not buying it. So one of my brothers went and bought it sometime later I tried it. I just said "Nope." after a few rounds and quit. I played with my Cousins fiance and my Uncle but never actually played it if you know what I mean?
So I hear MW3's release and I just said "Fuck CoD they had something good I'm not supporting their shit make a game every few months even if it sucks motto." So I haven't played it at all, I would if someone had it and was like "Give this a shot!" but Co-Workers and my brother have all been telling me how amazing it is, How much better it is than MW2 but personally I don't really care as MW2 and BO ruined the CoD series for me personally. CoD4 was great I still play it, MW2 I haven't played in forever, BO a few months ago with my Uncle but that's about it, he switched to BF:2 anyways said BO was shit.
Also one thing that really bugged me was they never Balanced or patched their games. I mean the Models were so OP for the longest time, Glitch spots and everything still in all the games today.
Don't get me wrong, I love CoD but this, this isn't really a new game but more like a minimal expansion pack, if even that.
Lol, I find the responses to that video even more hilarious. Serious lack of sarcasm detection.
Also, Activision milking a franchise for all it's worth? They wouldn't do that Afaik, the creators of MW got fired from IW after they were done with MW2 and they took most of their talent with them to form a new studion (Respawn Entertainment). IW is not going to make anything new ever.
Wow, so he actually got an error message that said "MW2" in it. What's really funny is that if these people are using mods on day 1 it means that it is the same game. It takes time for people to produce mods to a specific game, it being day 1 and them using mods means their mods from MW2 still work in MW3. Which essentially means, it is the same game with new maps.
It is shameful to charge 60$ for some new maps. I just wonder how long it will take for these kinds of practices to bite the industry in the ass.
Because that game can be really enjoyable, if only for a limited amount of time. By this point everybody knows how to play CoD and it never really changes, so its 100% pick it up and theres basically no learning curve except for learning maps. Also, even if you wanted to still play MW2 instead of getting the new MW3, theres basically nobody on anymore, at least on PC.
On December 10 2011 22:17 Kiante wrote: People like games where they can just jump in with little or no knowledge or skill and just have a bit of fun. thats why angry birds and sc2 are so popular, and its the same with MW3. Why should random gamer #10 learn how to fly a jet or work with a team in a game like BF3 when they can herp derp around with their super fast reloading guns firing at 6 bazillion shots per second and get nukes man
NUKES
I think that this is generally it.
If your friends are online, fantastic, you can jump in and play with them immediately. Even if they're not, you can sprint around getting a thousand knife fights until, like you said, you call down a nuke.
What.
People enjoy playing games where they're the hero, and MW3 (and the entire COD series) is really, REALLY good at making you feel that way. "You've killed everyone!"
from a pubbing aspect bf3 doesn't really require any more skill than cod games... in fact i would say aiming is even easier. on subject tho im not really sure why people buy mw3. for competition on the pc side of things, cod:mw1 (aka cod4) was the last decent one made. world at war/mw2/blackops were not played at all by competitive players
I bought it because 1) I wanted to see what happened to Soap 2) Spec Ops is fun 3) Multiplayer is actually fun. I don't know why people don't like it. Sure it can be frustrating, but playing with your friends is really fun. It is MW2 over again, but they took out a lot of the gay stuff - noob tubes are a 2 shot kill, commando is gone, last stand is now a 5 death streak, ect. It is a much better game than MW2 and I have had fun playing it.
I also don't get why people hate Black Ops. It was probably the best one made since CoD4, and I had a blast playing it.
On December 10 2011 22:17 Kiante wrote: People like games where they can just jump in with little or no knowledge or skill and just have a bit of fun. thats why angry birds and sc2 are so popular, and its the same with MW3. Why should random gamer #10 learn how to fly a jet or work with a team in a game like BF3 when they can herp derp around with their super fast reloading guns firing at 6 bazillion shots per second and get nukes man
1. Never played MW or MW2 so i dont give a damn about its "similarity" or w/e. 2. Want to know what happens next in SP 3. Spec ops is fun IMO. 4. A game where one can learn easily and play and own
Game sucks unless your playing with friends and messing around. My personal question is how people can play that game competitively i seriously cant ever take that game seriously.
On December 10 2011 22:11 achristes wrote: But seriously, MW3 looks just the same as MW2, except for the new maps, and "new" guns. Most of the guns are imported directly from previous CoD titles (throwing knife again, really?).
Most people don't realize they're being ripped off. They see a new shinny product. "OMG THIS LOOKS SO COOL", there's a lot of hyped because the series is already popular so people buy it.
I don't see why this whole game, which took what, 1-1.5 years to make is a game of it's own when it could most likely just be another DLC for the "meager" price of 20euros.
It took less time than that to make. They release a new one every year. It's the Sports Game catch 101. "Updated Roster with very few actual updates to the game".
No noticable engine upgrades, no new stuff (don't come bitching with "There are new perks/weapons/maps derp!" because it's not new, it's old, really old), and in my opinion, just another bad game in the CoD series.
Activision knows that people like the game. They know people will buy it. Give me one good reason not to milk the series and actually try to innovate further. They take baby steps to milk it as much as they can.
I wish people would realize that. It's a shame they manage to repackage an expansion pack as a full retail price. Some people buy it just for the campaign, which I guess might support the full retail price for those people, but for the majority, they just buy it for online, which is a real scam.
On December 10 2011 22:17 Kiante wrote: People like games where they can just jump in with little or no knowledge or skill and just have a bit of fun. thats why angry birds and sc2 are so popular, and its the same with MW3. Why should random gamer #10 learn how to fly a jet or work with a team in a game like BF3 when they can herp derp around with their super fast reloading guns firing at 6 bazillion shots per second and get nukes man
NUKES
BF3 appeals to the same kind of audience as MW3.
Not really
Whoring KDR in BF3 doesn't win games (very well). Also, the guns aren't freaking lasers either
I didn't get it because the majority of multiplayer people on Black Ops consist of immature 11 year old kids (not being age-ist, I'm sure there are mature 11 year olds) that are pre-pubescent and it's like you're playing with Justin Biebers that scream in the mic.
I don't own the game, but based on what I've played at my friend's house (corner trapping in Search and Destroy comes to mind) that's all I can hear on the mic. Not blaming the game, but based on personal experience.
I don't understand what's all this MW3 excitement, I'm just gonna bash Starcraft 2 because it's just more awesome then Call of Duty will ever be
On December 10 2011 22:17 Kiante wrote: People like games where they can just jump in with little or no knowledge or skill and just have a bit of fun. thats why angry birds and sc2 are so popular, and its the same with MW3. Why should random gamer #10 learn how to fly a jet or work with a team in a game like BF3 when they can herp derp around with their super fast reloading guns firing at 6 bazillion shots per second and get nukes man
NUKES
BF3 appeals to the same kind of audience as MW3.
Not really
Whoring KDR in BF3 doesn't win games (very well). Also, the guns aren't freaking lasers either
this is actually the main reason why i play objective games or at least kill confirmed rather than standard team deathmatch. i've literally played games where a player has gone 50-5 and had his team's score doubled because he was just whoring kills instead of playing the objective
MW3 is bought in general by the much higher than average skill level players, they are people who have been in the competitive FPS scene since Counterstrike 1.3. Its basically the most skill based game on the market at the moment, much higher skill than 1.6 or sc2 for example. 1.6 and sc2 in general are played by really bad people such as console peasants or retro-evolving chest beaters. The MW franchise is so good because they make huge improvements in each game they release and help the community by adding new maps for free every other weekend. It takes skill to play MW3 and it really does not favour the casual noobs who play skilless games like sc2 or 1.6.
i bought mw1 and had fun. then i bought world at war and mw2 and i felt because they looked the same it would be fun. but it dosent have the staying power of scbw and such. longevity you know
On December 11 2011 03:17 Swwww wrote: MW3 is bought in general by the much higher than average skill level players, they are people who have been in the competitive FPS scene since Counterstrike 1.3. Its basically the most skill based game on the market at the moment, much higher skill than 1.6 or sc2 for example. 1.6 and sc2 in general are played by really bad people such as console peasants or retro-evolving chest beaters. The MW franchise is so good because they make huge improvements in each game they release and help the community by adding new maps for free every other weekend. It takes skill to play MW3 and it really does not favour the casual noobs who play skilless games like sc2 or 1.6.
Can't...tell...if...trolling... I've played Call of Duty on consoles and I can easily get at least 1KDR (and I don't own the game, I play at friend's house) because when you see someone, you press L1, auto-aim, R2/R1 (forgot) and you kill him. Maybe reflexes, but it doesn't take nearly as much skill as the games you just listed.
Because it takes pretty much zero effort to do decently, you can jump right in and play, and most importantly, it's fun. Besides, I liked MW2 but stopped playing because of all the broken stuff, so when I heard that MW3 was the same thing but more balanced, I knew it'd be good. Except the cramped map design
Also I'm very proud of TL. I thought this would be a CoD bash topic, but the haters have left their bias at the door, it seems.
On December 11 2011 03:17 Swwww wrote: MW3 is bought in general by the much higher than average skill level players, they are people who have been in the competitive FPS scene since Counterstrike 1.3. Its basically the most skill based game on the market at the moment, much higher skill than 1.6 or sc2 for example. 1.6 and sc2 in general are played by really bad people such as console peasants or retro-evolving chest beaters. The MW franchise is so good because they make huge improvements in each game they release and help the community by adding new maps for free every other weekend. It takes skill to play MW3 and it really does not favour the casual noobs who play skilless games like sc2 or 1.6.
Can't...tell...if...trolling... I've played Call of Duty on consoles and I can easily get at least 1KDR (and I don't own the game, I play at friend's house) because when you see someone, you press L1, auto-aim, R2/R1 (forgot) and you kill him. Maybe reflexes, but it doesn't take nearly as much skill as the games you just listed.
Lol he's trolling, MW3= Expansion of MW2 and the map packs are never free which theydo come out like once a month. Cmon SC2/CS<MW3 skill level hahahahaha
On December 11 2011 04:42 Galaxy613 wrote: Yeah, why do people byy MW3 when you can get MW4 Mercs for free from Mektek? But everyone knows MW2 in DOS was really the star of the series.
On December 11 2011 04:42 Galaxy613 wrote: Yeah, why do people byy MW3 when you can get MW4 Mercs for free from Mektek? But everyone knows MW2 in DOS was really the star of the series.
Oh, I forgot Modern Warfare and MechWarrior are both "MW", which IMO is a huge mistake on my part TT
The CoD series are by far the most popular shooters. Therefore the most people get them and they become a social game. If you want to play with your friends, you get CoD. How it got this way? CoD4 was amazing, WaW was fun. Bam! Reputation built.
Wasn't MW2 really just MW1.5? And MW3 is MW2.5, so it's really MW1.75. So they just sold .75 of a game for 2 games worth in profit. GG, Infinity Ward. GG.
MW and MW2 had decent single-player campaigns. The multiplayer just gets boring though... I think I played it for like 2 weeks or something before I just got bored of it. Don't see how people can play that all the time.
I have no idea myself. I get that people want & enjoy casual games they can just jump into with friends or whatever, but I cannot understand why they're paying full price for what is basically an expansion pack of MW2. If masses of people continue to buy the repetitive crap Activision puts out every year, I shudder to think what will happen to the industry in the future.
Because everyone thinks every friend is going to buy it, and the only way to keep playing games with your best buddies is to also get the game.
Therefore, everyone gets it, and Bobby Kotick laughs all the way to the bank.
Also CoD vods are consistently up there on Youtube, and lots of kids think they are pro at FPS and can become efamous and pro and make a million dollars by playing a game all day, a bit like half of all the blogs here.
On December 10 2011 23:00 Kiante wrote: dont get me wrong, i'm not bashing MW3 or SC2 or angry birds. i enjoy some of them when i'm in the mood. often its hard to really bring up the mental energy to play a "harder" game and I just wanna relax. Thats why MW3 is so successful. no mental commitment needed, its fully relaxation instead of a challenge.
yeah i agree with his comments about mw3. it seems like a great LAN game thats easy to pickup and play.
What I find most puzzling about the Call of Duty series is that people play these games competitively, despite their incredibly brief lifespan.
I can understand why people buy the game and play it, but I struggle to see why anyone would want to watch it as an esport when the damn thing changes next year... ... unless it doesn't change that much, hm...
On December 11 2011 15:06 Kanil wrote: What I find most puzzling about the Call of Duty series is that people play these games competitively, despite their incredibly brief lifespan.
I can understand why people buy the game and play it, but I struggle to see why anyone would want to watch it as an esport when the damn thing changes next year... ... unless it doesn't change that much, hm...
The short lifespan is artificial - the games would last much longer if they were given a chance, but that's not very profitable to Activision as they can spend a couple of bucks making a $10 DLC to sell it for $60. This makes the previous games obsolete.
Regardless playing MW2 a lot makes you better at Blackops and playing Blackops a lot makes you better at MW3 in many ways, the game are ridiculously similar, so it's easy for a competitive team to adapt to a new game. I mean, SC2 is being played competitively and we know darn well within a few months now the game won't play the same at all... Hell, I bet the difference between WoL and HotS will be more pronounced than the difference between COD4 and CODMW3 in terms of how the game is played.
Activision's COD franchise is even a bigger insult to gamers than EA's yearly re-release of sports games. Blackops players don't have a choice to buy MW3 - if (somehow) you enjoy COD, you have to have the latest one.
cause some people just really like CoD, and play it for hundreds of hours, and if it's the only game they're going to buy then why not? It's not for everyone but all the "CoD sucks you're dumb for playing it" is getting more annoying than the people who buy and play CoD every year.
On December 11 2011 15:27 DystopiaX wrote: cause some people just really like CoD, and play it for hundreds of hours, and if it's the only game they're going to buy then why not? It's not for everyone but all the "CoD sucks you're dumb for playing it" is getting more annoying than the people who buy and play CoD every year.
Well there's a point behind it as far as I'm concerned. The gaming market is getting stale and companies just squeezes out a bunch of terrible games and people buy them, and there are only a few exceptions to that rule.
It's unfortunate because if people stopped buying garbage, it would force Activision and EA to actually hire competent devs that are able to come up with good ideas instead of mass-releasing old news. Right now, the number of good games that come out in a year is probably a single digit... It would be nice to get more than that.
On December 11 2011 09:37 Swwww wrote: People buy it because its targeted perfectly at low IQ console gamers :p
lol I wouldn't go that far =p but pretty much >.> I think some people just like those types of games and will let themselves be taken advantage of because their parents pay for everything else.............
I really do not see the point of questioning someones motives to buy a certain game, just because you dislike it. Don't like the game? Sure, but don't shit on people who do. You're a bit close to being rude, because people may have a different preference. Wooptiedoo.
Edit:
The game has a different scope in which they aim to please their audience. That does not make a game garbage. Perhaps games like BF3 are more realistic and perhaps also better. Sure. However the problem with games like BF3 is that you need to have a good team of friends to really get maximum performance. With games like MW3, this barrier isn't there. It is easier for the gamer to just go out, kill some and have an okay time. If they want to be serious, they will play BF3 anyways. Just let people choose and stop complaining about a game that you don't like because it's not within your view of how you like to play games.
I really do not see the point of questioning someones motives to buy a certain game, just because you dislike it. Don't like the game? Sure, but don't shit on people who do. You're a bit close to being rude, because people may have a different preference. Wooptiedoo.
What ? Rude ? Shit on people who play CoD ? I never said I don't like CoD, I have 400+ hours of MW2 gametime on steam. The question I asked is; why would people buy a "repackage" of the same game that was released one year ago with almost no new content at all for 50€?
(If this was not directed towards me, disregard this post)
Single player + Spec Ops. The first MW was probably my second favourite single player FPS experience ever (behind the HL series of course), and I just had to see how it ended.. Even after the decidedly average MW2 campaign.
I was fully aware that the MP component was basically MW2.1, but that didn't bother me since I really had no intention of playing it (I'll play BF3 if I want to play a multiplayer FPS).
I really do not see the point of questioning someones motives to buy a certain game, just because you dislike it. Don't like the game? Sure, but don't shit on people who do. You're a bit close to being rude, because people may have a different preference. Wooptiedoo.
What ? Rude ? Shit on people who play CoD ? I never said I don't like CoD, I have 400+ hours of MW2 gametime on steam. The question I asked is; why would people buy a "repackage" of the same game that was released one year ago with almost no new content at all for 50€?
(If this was not directed towards me, disregard this post)
probably not (just) you, I can see plenty of people who are being elitist gamer douchebags towards cod players
Lol talk about perfect timing. Just saw this on Yahoo. MW3 is offically the fastest selling product to get $1 billion in revenue, beating out the previous record holder, Avatar. Sigh, I just find it a crime that games like this get all the sales and all the video game gems out there get buried in this shit.
Activision: ‘Modern Warfare 3′ is the fastest to $1 billion
"It's been a rocky year for video games sales, but don't tell that to Call of Duty.
Game publisher Activision Blizzard announced on Monday that Modern Warfare 3, the latest entry in their blockbuster shooter series, topped $1 billion in worldwide sales a record 16 days after its release on November 8th. That beats the previous record holder, James Cameron's 2009 3D film "Avatar", which took 17 days to reach the mark.
Read: James Cameron slapped with lawsuit over "Avatar" plot
"Call of Duty has become that rare entertainment franchise that transcends its own genre" said Eric Hirshberg, CEO of Activision Publishing. "Core gamers love it, as our stellar reviews show. But every year, new people are drawn into Call of Duty."
Reaching $1 billion in just over two weeks is impressive, but it's not like we didn't see it coming. The game already set new entertainment launch records by earning $400 million in its first 24 hours and $775 million in its first five days.
Modern Warfare 3's spectacular start -- a full 7% ahead of last year's smash hit Call of Duty: Black Ops -- helped November game sales exceed analyst expectations, though on the whole, 2011 has been a down year for the industry.
Activision is also seeing dollar signs thanks to the company's Call of Duty Elite subscription service, which gives users access to a robust suite of stat tracking, tips and other features. Over 6 million players have registered for the service since launching alongside Modern Warfare 3 in early November, a million of which are paid, premium subscriptions. Activision points out it took Netflix and Xbox Live a solid year to reach one million paid subscribers.
Critics are digging the game, too. Over the weekend, Modern Warfare 3 won the 'Best Shooter' category in the 2011 Spike TV Video Game Awards."
People buy it because it is fun and easy to pick up. The game parallels Halo, which are both very popular and successful titles. It is also very mainstream to a point that almost everyone knows what Call of Duty is. I personally don't care since CoD4 was the last game I bought and liked. People that bash on the franchise are just sad, sad, sad people.
I agree. I got burned with call of duty black ops. Wont buy another game.
But wait, Activisions OWNS blizzard too. Didnt blizzard split SC2 into 3 parts? As much as fanboys of CoD OR blizzard's SC won't like to admit, Activision is the boss. Activision calls the shots and fires people at the end of the day. Blizzard is not some autonomous entity. It Must do as told by the bosses, and the bosses get told what will make the most profits by the projectionists.
On December 16 2011 10:51 Humanfails wrote: I agree. I got burned with call of duty black ops. Wont buy another game.
But wait, Activisions OWNS blizzard too. Didnt blizzard split SC2 into 3 parts? As much as fanboys of CoD OR blizzard's SC won't like to admit, Activision is the boss. Activision calls the shots and fires people at the end of the day. Blizzard is not some autonomous entity. It Must do as told by the bosses, and the bosses get told what will make the most profits by the projectionists.
Watch where you point those Wikipedia links! Also stop saying that the game was "split into 3 parts" the only thing that WoL had chopped from it was the Zerg and Protoss campaigns; that's hardly "splitting the game into 3 parts".
I bought and enjoyed COD4 when it came out. Never thought about buying MW2. Got blackops because I thought it looked neat. Never thought once about buying MW3. Not sure why. I ALWAYS play through the single player of these games before I decide to buy them. Blackops I really liked. All the other game were really mediocre. As for online play, I never really took it seriously. If I want competitive FPS I just load up come CS1.6.
EPT
Afaik, the creators of MW got fired from IW after they were done with MW2 and they took most of their talent with them to form a new studion (Respawn Entertainment). IW is not going to make anything new ever.
