Modern warfare 3

  • Thread starter Thread starter Akira AC
  • 2,515 comments
  • 144,069 views
I think that the character customization with perks should've stayed, but depending on a combination of perks that you wear. For instance if you had Extreme Conditioning and Stalker (both perks that affect movement speed) you'll have a character with light armour. If you had both Blind Eye and Assassin (perks that hide you from Killstreaks and Enemy Equipment respectively) then you'd have a ghillie suit, with or without a sniper rifle.
 
Played a couple games last night against the 5th ranked player in team death match last night. He had over 37,000 kills. I've played alot so far, and only have like 4500 with a 1.5 K/D. His K/D was right at 2 so that means he would have to have about 9 days logged in so far to get that many kills. How anyone could have that amount of free time to do anything since this game has been out blows my mind. I have almost 2 1/2 days logged in so he would need almost 9 days to get that many kills. The game has only been out like 28 days or so. How could you possibly play that much? He would have to have played for almost 8 hours a day since release.
 
nk4e
I like COD, but I am not going to spend a years worth of time to get the 10th prestige. Fighting games doesn't require much. A tv, and two controllers. If you want to play a FPS right. Its two tv's, two controllers and headsets ( sometimes you need more than two) I look at MW3 and GOW3 for the story than I didn't with BF3.
Click to expand...

Why do you need two controllers and two tv's to play an fps right?
 
Daniel
Maybe he's been playing Ground War continuously.
Click to expand...

It was 37,000 kills, and all of those kills were in team death match. I found him today, his name is BIG DOGN he's ranked 22 overall and has almost 10 days logged in. I really don't know how anyone could play over 8 hours a day of modern warfare, for as long as he has.
 
nk4e
I like COD, but I am not going to spend a years worth of time to get the 10th prestige. Fighting games doesn't require much. A tv, and two controllers. If you want to play a FPS right. Its two tv's, two controllers and headsets ( sometimes you need more than two) I look at MW3 and GOW3 for the story than I didn't with BF3.
Click to expand...

I don't understand this either. Why would you need 1 tv and 2 controllers for a fighting game, and 2 tvs, 2 controllers for FPS?
 
There's generally one screen for a fighting game, whereas FPS's need split screen to play two player. And split-screen online is pretty crap.

EDIT: Also, there's a challenge for calling in two MOABs. Must be a secret challenge..
 
Last edited:
Daniel
There's generally one screen for a fighting game, whereas FPS's need split screen to play two player. And split-screen online is pretty crap.
Click to expand...


Why would anyone play split screen online anyway? If your playing MW3 you should be able to afford your own tv and 360. In all honesty if you can't get your own tv and 360, your probably not old enough to be playing 90% of the FPS on the market.
 
bevo
Why would anyone play split screen online anyway? If your playing MW3 you should be able to afford your own tv and 360. In all honesty if you can't get your own tv and 360, your probably not old enough to be playing 90% of the FPS on the market.
Click to expand...

Ever heard of younger brothers?
 
gogatrs
Ever heard of younger brothers?
Click to expand...

I guess, but I know when I was young there wasn't alot of sharing going on with me and my younger sibling, so I kind of forget about the sharing between brothers and sisters.
 
I love putting Remote Sentries in covering positions. Underground in the bus shelter, 4 kills. One coming up through the terminal (which I never go in as I always get killed by campers too lazy to move), two from the subway on the right-hand side and one by the bus. It's so much fun when you have a decent place to put it.

Really appreciating the Support streak now when you aren't having the best of nights in terms of streaks but still getting a decent amount of kills. Stealth bomber seems to work so well on most of the maps as well.

Horrible night, full of campers and a few hackers (yellow clan tags being one of them?) and one odd moment where someone TK'd their own player and then about 3 seconds after they'd killed them, both of their players had disappeared (this is from kill cam) and one of our team appears out of nowhere (not a spawn point I recognise) and gets killed. Odd.

Still last 4-5 games were good fun. When it works and you get a decent lobby, it's a great game, just a shame about those who like to not move.
 
purplenurple
Why do you need two controllers and two tv's to play an fps right?
Click to expand...

bevo
I don't understand this either. Why would you need 1 tv and 2 controllers for a fighting game, and 2 tvs, 2 controllers for FPS?
Click to expand...

Playing Split screen on a FPS gives me a headache, I am use to my own POV. My nephews play this and they screen camp. For Fighting Games, both players are only concentrated on their life bar and their positioning.
 
I think I am going to trade this in for BF3 on Saturday.

I have tried it, and it seems like there is less childish behaviour.

The main reason for me though, is I am not good enough to run and gun, as I don't have the reactions or uber-leet-ness, or whatever, so I like to camp and snipe people.

I cannot do that in MW3, there are no maps big enough for me to get one or two kills without someone who is running and gunning to trip over me within a few seconds.

I went down 23 times the other day, due to spawns and my secondary having no effect against Italians and their connection.

Bah.

:grumpy:👍
 
Disappointing, but not massively surprising. It is more fast paced than any other MW game. I've only ever sniped at Resistance, compare it with MW2 maps like Wasteland, Invasion, Derail, etc, which were really good for sniping and a bit less chaotic the fine.

I quite like how the maps have gone in MW3, I don't think MW3 should try and be a long range big map battle like BF3 and should stick to being a more arcadey, reflex shooter. Though I think they missed a trick with Village, that could have been the less dull version of Wasteland if they'd been a bit more creative instead of those caves.

I'll miss killing with ya, I want to try BF3 at some point (even if I hate the player sway), but not sure I'll buy it as my unhealthy obsession with snooker has returned and my games budget has gone over to that!

As with any FPS, when it's good, MW3 is very good, but when it's bad it's frustrating as hell, that's the human element for you. Patch 1.06 is supposed to contain a few decent changes, so hopefully that'll improve.
 
If I can afford it, I'll keep them both.

But the problem lies in the fact that I can more than likely trade MW3 in for BF3 without paying anything.....

Hmmm.....

The DLC will probably solve my problems with some better mappage, but think about it... have you really been as keen to bang MW3 in as you were to play MW2 with all the guys?
I've spent more time on GT5 since I bought MW3, and that tells me something without even thinking about it.

I don't know, I am in a quandary about it, as I like the feel of COD, but I dislike a lot about it's latest incarnation.

I just can't shake the feeling that it's Treyarch behind the scenes.......
I hated BLops, I loved MW2, but MW3 just hasn't gripped me in the same way.....

aaaaarrrrrrggggh.

Maybe I should go dust off my cue, and stick to that as well..... at least that game requires some form of movement that is greater than just opposable thumb stretching.....

Ho hum.....

We'll see.....

Cue (ahem) flaming.....

:irked:👍
 
Am I as likely to want to put MW3 in as I was with MW2? No, but then that's more to do with the fact our group of regulars has lost 2 or 3, so we're never one whole team pwning everybody. The fact we always played as a group was what kept me playing MW2, I hated quite a lot of it (private matches on rust with random range shotguns never got boring, hilarity). Helping each other kill people over mics is what made it so enjoyable, team work and all that.
 
peobryant
No, it means Modern Warfare 3. :dunce:

I always laugh at the people that act like Call of Duty is a waste of money because it comes out yearly. I paid $60 for the game new (well $100 because I bought the Hardened Edition) and I can absolutely guarantee you that I will put more than 100 hours into the game (wow, that sounds really bad when you say it out loud) so it's actually a damn fine way to spend my money.


Parker
Click to expand...

I don't like the game one damn bit. It's a damn stupid a$$ game, GT5 much better!
 
Go troll somewhere else, if you don't like a game why are you coming into the thread to say so?
 
jth
Once again.....; mw3=money wasted 3!
Click to expand...

And once again... That is your opinion. MW3 is I admit similar to MW2, but it works. If something's successful then why change it?

And I don't find MW3 to be purely down to reaction time at all like most say. MW3 is all about strategy, or maybe anticipation.
I am known to have a meh reaction time (I've tested it on the net), yet I have no difficulty playing slower game modes in CoD (sabotage). Expecting your opponent is what defines a good player, and that goes from any game style, from run and gunning to sniping.
When you have achieved this skill flanking is recommended. If properly executed, you can seriously rack up the kills fast. After I learnt to do this my k/d ratio ascended over time to my current status of around 1.84 (I can't remember exactly).
 
jth
I don't like the game one damn bit. It's a damn stupid a$$ game, GT5 much better!
Click to expand...

I felt the same way about GT5. I got tired of it after a few days and haven't played it for months. After getting iracing GT5 is pretty much dead to me. I actually do like this COD though. I hated black ops and World at war, but I'm liking MW3.
 

Latest Posts

Back