(Hesitant) Modern Warfare 3 Thread

[1337dingo]

I think it boils down to console vs pc, regardless of game. When I say regardless of game I mean any game period, not just MW3 vs BF3. The PC gaming crowd tends to be a older, more mature crowd. While the console attracts a younger, and often times, immature crowd.

With that being said, I think if you look at the difference between MW2 and MW3 it's hard to justify the purchase for some. And most reviews are tending support that theroy, which doesnt make it a bad game, just not worthy of its new game $59.99 price tag. I think you will see COD franchise fade out much like Halo. In large part because they continue to pump out a game that looks like it could be an expansion pack or DLC for consoles.

both of these statements are correct though, xbox is also better online than ps3 i have a feeling this is because ps3 is free online so kids can use it no matter what as xbox is paid therefore parents dont always get it for them, but pc wins because i have not once heard little kids go off on that..

 

[Phy]

The average xbox gamer is between 12-18, while the ps3 is 24+. I don't know what the average PC gamer age is, but I would guess mid 20's, because like the ps3 price plays a role in the average user base age.

 

[JlCollins005]

I think it boils down to console vs pc, regardless of game. When I say regardless of game I mean any game period, not just MW3 vs BF3. The PC gaming crowd tends to be a older, more mature crowd. While the console attracts a younger, and often times, immature crowd.

With that being said, I think if you look at the difference between MW2 and MW3 it's hard to justify the purchase for some. And most reviews are tending support that theroy, which doesnt make it a bad game, just not worthy of its new game $59.99 price tag. I think you will see COD franchise fade out much like Halo. In large part because they continue to pump out a game that looks like it could be an expansion pack or DLC for consoles.

actually halo reach was nothing like the rest, and IMO sucked, i would have been much happier with a similar feel to halo2/3 which apparently is what the next halo is gunna be

 

[SuperDuperMe]

The average xbox gamer is between 12-18, while the ps3 is 24+. I don't know what the average PC gamer age is, but I would guess mid 20's, because like the ps3 price plays a role in the average user base age.

Is there anything to back that up? As from my knowledge its a lot younger based on what i have seen.

I know a lot more people who have bought there 12-13 year old kids a ps3 over xbox as its free online.

i would say more likely the average age of users is practically the same for ps3 and xbox,

 

[Troncoso]

Is there anything to back that up? As from my knowledge its a lot younger based on what i have seen.

I know a lot more people who have bought there 12-13 year old kids a ps3 over xbox as its free online.

i would say more likely the average age of users is practically the same for ps3 and xbox,

From what I've seen, more kids get an xbox because it's cheaper. Most parents don't think about online when buying kids their toys.

Back on topic:

I've played a couple missions of the campaign, and I must say, the controls are extremely tight and responsive. I love how they feel. It really doesn't feel like MW2. The UI is a slightly refine and the graphics (while not by much) are better.

I really love and hate multiplayer so far. I love the weapon levels, the point streaks (though, I don't really know what they are), the fast pace, and the overall feeling of jumping into something new again. New maps/weapons is obvious. But, my favorite thing is discovering all the new challenges to complete and unlocking more weapons and perks.

What I hate about multiplayer is that people are playing it so non-stop, that way to many people ar every high level, or have already prestiged. That's not the game's fault though.

 

[CrazyMike]

What I hate about multiplayer is that people are playing it so non-stop, that way to many people ar every high level, or have already prestiged. That's not the game's fault though.

In a way it IS the game developers fault. I really dislike that a fresh guy wants to jump into a match to learn the multiplayer and has to go up against 4 or 5 prestiged opponents. Number one this isn't fair to the noob and how do you expect the player get to become any good when he is going up against people that doesn't allow him to walk 30ft without dieing.

It should place you in catagories of ranks closest to your rank (halo did this) that way it gives the person a chance to progress. It's like sticking average joe into an Indy car and put him in a race with all 20yr vetrans.

 

[Aastii]

In a way it IS the game developers fault. I really dislike that a fresh guy wants to jump into a match to learn the multiplayer and has to go up against 4 or 5 prestiged opponents. Number one this isn't fair to the noob and how do you expect the player get to become any good when he is going up against people that doesn't allow him to walk 30ft without dieing.

It should place you in catagories of ranks closest to your rank (halo did this) that way it gives the person a chance to progress. It's like sticking average joe into an Indy car and put him in a race with all 20yr vetrans.

Because matchmaking rarely works, especially in a game like CoD where:

1. Level means very little with regard to skill
2. You can be the greatest person ever, but the rest of your team can lose the game for you still

What that will do is force people to be pitted against people their level, so still better players than you, or with people who are utter crap. With the latter or a combination of both, if they put in ranking to try and keep things fair, you will get stuck in the lower levels.

This was and still is demonstrated in LoL where you get put in what is termed "ELO hell". Even if you are good at the game, the other 4 can and often will lose it for you making it close to impossible to break out and be with equally skilled people. In MW3 it will be even worse because you get rewarded for being bad at the game, so you are in a catch 22.

With full dedi servers this wasn't a problem, you could always go and find a server with people of equal skill if not level, so things were always fun

 

[CrazyMike]

Because matchmaking rarely works, especially in a game like CoD where:

1. Level means very little with regard to skill
2. You can be the greatest person ever, but the rest of your team can lose the game for you still

What that will do is force people to be pitted against people their level, so still better players than you, or with people who are utter crap. With the latter or a combination of both, if they put in ranking to try and keep things fair, you will get stuck in the lower levels.

This was and still is demonstrated in LoL where you get put in what is termed "ELO hell". Even if you are good at the game, the other 4 can and often will lose it for you making it close to impossible to break out and be with equally skilled people. In MW3 it will be even worse because you get rewarded for being bad at the game, so you are in a catch 22.

With full dedi servers this wasn't a problem, you could always go and find a server with people of equal skill if not level, so things were always fun

Hate to use this example but.... I believe it was Halo 2 that there were numbered ranks. You do crappy on a game or lose a game, your rank goes down. You don't get points just for playing online. Basically there are ways to get around this but for the majority of it, you were skilled at the rank you were rated at. This combined with matching with your rank number, would work wonders.

 

[Phy]

Is there anything to back that up? As from my knowledge its a lot younger based on what i have seen.

I know a lot more people who have bought there 12-13 year old kids a ps3 over xbox as its free online.

i would say more likely the average age of users is practically the same for ps3 and xbox,

I read it in an article on the BF3 forums, I don't remember the source though. It basically said the stereotype was true of xbox gamers. (They're younger)

 

[Aastii]

The average xbox gamer is between 12-18, while the ps3 is 24+. I don't know what the average PC gamer age is, but I would guess mid 20's, because like the ps3 price plays a role in the average user base age.

It would vary depending on the game.

My experience (though this is probably not reflective of reality) in communities, be it clans or just groups of people, ranges. I have been with people who are 15, but then I have also been with people in their 70's-80's. The upper end is very rare though, the majority I have played with have been, at the youngest, early 20's, and the oldest mid-late 40's

Hate to use this example but.... I believe it was Halo 2 that there were numbered ranks. You do crappy on a game or lose a game, your rank goes down. You don't get points just for playing online. Basically there are ways to get around this but for the majority of it, you were skilled at the rank you were rated at. This combined with matching with your rank number, would work wonders.

OK, this is why I don't see how it would work:

I am decent at CoD4. Throw me in a public server and I can easily beat 5 or 6 people on my own no problem. However in a full game wither at least 8-10 per side at a minimum, I generally am not as good as I am when alone because I find myself depending on others, getting let down by others or getting overwhelmed. As much as I can handle myself, I am not a god .

It is for this reason that if you are in a lower rank than you should be, yes you will find compared to others you will be better, but you will also find that you are trying to 1-man-army a lot of the time because team mates are useless.

Now I am sure that there isn't the potential for a system that will work and I will admit now, I haven't played Halo, except for 1 on PC and about 2 hours of 2 on Xbox , so can't say if it did work well, but the ideas put on the table thus far haven't worked because people always get stuck at a lower rank than they deserve and find it an uphill struggle unless they play every game with friends who are also skilled.


More on topic, everyone that has MW3 in my clan has the same point of view as I did (these are people that bought the game...), it is MW2 with some extra tat stuck on. Glad I didn't buy it or even look into it other than playing the pre-release

 

[Phy]

Rank doesn't play a huge part in MW3 because the starter classes are pretty decent. The starter weapons themselves are pretty decent also for when you get to create your own class.

 

[BurningSkyline]

I think I am going to get it. Gamestop has a good deal on it (link). I do not like Gamestop at all, so I am going to try to rip them off by bringing in the Lego Batman/Pure games I got with my xbox 360 (in the same case) and see if they will accept the deal. Although, they probably won't because it is "Subject to Manager Approval." It says the deal ends on 01/07/11, but it must be a typo.

 

[Phy]

Gamestop has some promotions that run basically all year long, they just change the wording around.

 

[CareyS]

I got mine on launch night on Tuesday at midnight, I like it and im glad they finally made a new game, MW2 is awesome but it was getting kinda boring. MW3 is a great game though.

 

[Phy]

Anyone else get "disc read error" while loading new maps?

 

[JLuchinski]

Anyone else get "disc read error" while loading new maps?

Sounds like you got a bad disc. Take it back and exchange it, it's happened to me before.

 

[Phy]

I don't have a disc, which is why I ask.

 

[BurningSkyline]

I'll do a short review later... Played MP for a few hours and it was a lot of fun. For me Kill Confirmed is the most fun, especially against bad players

I'm going to pull an all-nighter and play the campaign.

 

[JLuchinski]

I don't have a disc, which is why I ask.

Download through Steam?

 

[BurningSkyline]

Quick review/opinion of the campaign: (SPOILER FREE)

It is pretty good, although I think I may like the MW2 campaign a little more. In some parts, it can get a little boring, as do most games in some parts. It took me 4h20m to finish it on recruit.