Call of Duty v9 - Still not as shit as BF3! - Games

Is it just me or does killing enemies in the campaign just feel like a chore?

HNNNG. The wait 'till today was bad, and now I gotta wait for it to actually arrive... ITS KILLING ME! On another note, my friend went to the midnight release, but I haven't heard from him... I wonder when he actually got it.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;33180586]No they don't, they gave Bad Company 2 an 8.9. Crysis got a 9. Even mediocre games like Homefront and Brink got 7's which is not really far less. [editline]8th November 2011[/editline] I don't really understand that review. His only two complaints were the short campaign (dock a point for that) and then a complaint about the multiplayer being too similar to previous entries in the series. That said it's the only review below 9/10 I have seen so far so maybe it's just a one off.[/QUOTE] Well, I've seen two reviews under 9. Gamereactor gave it a 8. Graphics: 7 Gameplay: 9 Sounds: 8 Durabillity: 9 But if you like the series, who would really give two-fucks about reviews? I myself plays both BF3 and CoD.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;33180586]I don't really understand that review. His only two complaints were the short campaign (dock a point for that) and then a complaint about the multiplayer being too similar to previous entries in the series. That said it's the only review below 9/10 I have seen so far so maybe it's just a one off.[/QUOTE] Well, to a lot of people, those 2 things are perfectly enough to rate a game down and I don't see what's wrong with that.

[QUOTE=simkas;33180652]Well, to a lot of people, those 2 things are perfectly enough to rate a game down and I don't see what's wrong with that.[/QUOTE] The second one definitely is not a critical reason to rate a game down, it's an argument I expect to hear from a biased FPer and not someone who is paid money to offer his opinion on video games. If you feel the need to point it out then it should atleast be in a neutral light, not under the Cons sections as if it's a fact that it being similar to previous iterations is a bad thing. I don't mind the score, it's the reasoning. Even if he gave it a 9.8 out of 10 and still dropped that line I'd still be confused. Why have someone review a game if they are going in with bias for or against it?

[QUOTE=Raidyr;33180671]The second one definitely is not a critical reason to rate a game down, it's an argument I expect to hear from a biased FPer and not someone who is paid money to offer his opinion on video games. If you feel the need to point it out then it should atleast be in a neutral light, not under the Cons sections as if it's a fact that it being similar to previous iterations is a bad thing. I don't mind the score, it's the reasoning. Even if he gave it a 9.8 out of 10 and still dropped that line I'd still be confused. Why have someone review a game if they are going in with bias for or against it?[/QUOTE] It's not bias, a game being the same as the previous game in the series is a legitimate complaint. Games aren't rated on their own all the time, if they're part of a big series, they're rated as part of that series.

[QUOTE=simkas;33180700]It's not bias, a game being the same as the previous game in the series is a legitimate complaint. Games aren't rated on their own all the time, if they're part of a big series, they're rated as part of that series.[/QUOTE] That's entirely ass backwards. It's a standalone product it should be rated by itself. It's clear bias because the reviewer went in already "sick" of the gameplay and saw another rendition of it as being a bad thing.

MAYBE, just maybe a number doesn't define how good a game is.

MW3 has a higher average reviewer score than BF3 on Metacritic currently. Obviously MW3 is better, and that fact can never be disputed. Also BF3 gives you cancer and makes you sterile and makes your arms fall off if you look directly at it.

[QUOTE=zelchacha;33180721]MAYBE, just maybe a number doesn't define how good a game is.[/QUOTE] Like I said, the arbitrary number tagged to the end of the review doesn't matter, but I expect a little bit more out of critics when they are getting paid money on a fairly up and up website to critique things. Pointing out similarity to other entries in the series is a fact that you can state but outright calling that a bad thing is bias pure and simple. The IGN and GT review (and every other review basically) have pointed out the similarities but keep it at a neutral perspective because some people don't want different while some people do. It's up for the user to decide. [editline]8th November 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Grim Joker;33180768]MW3 has a higher average reviewer score than BF3 on Metacritic currently. Obviously MW3 is better, and that fact can never be disputed. Also BF3 gives you cancer and makes you sterile and makes your arms fall off if you look directly at it.[/QUOTE] I like both series and watching each entry this year get rave reviews is really nice. As much as people like to fight between the two, I think we can all agree that the gamer's are the real winners this season. Fuck me that was corny.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;33180775]Like I said, the arbitrary number tagged to the end of the review doesn't matter, but I expect a little bit more out of critics when they are getting paid money on a fairly up and up website to critique things. Pointing out similarity to other entries in the series is a fact that you can state but outright calling that a bad thing is bias pure and simple. The IGN and GT review (and every other review basically) have pointed out the similarities but keep it at a neutral perspective because some people don't want different while some people do. It's up for the user to decide. [editline]8th November 2011[/editline] I like both series and watching each entry this year get rave reviews is really nice. As much as people like to fight between the two, I think we can all agree that the gamer's are the real winners this season. Fuck me that was corny.[/QUOTE] Apparently there are some raging fans on Metacritic at the moment. With a user review score of a whopping (2.9) One guy said "A soulless cash-in, Modern Warfare 3 represents everything that is wrong with modern gaming. I have no doubt that it will be showered with 9+ scores, but in reality this is merely a phoned-in recycle of a 4 year old game."

User reviews for a game as enormously popular as MW3 aren't entirely reliable, to say the least.

Oh my god... The L118 is pure awesome sex. This game is MW1 and MW2 mashed together and made even better!

Did anyone buy mw3 off int keys?

garry is trolling ggd big time :v: i'm eagerly awaiting some more gameplay videos.

Can someone explain to me how the game has improved over Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2? I'm not trying to start anything I just was wondering because every review I have seen lacks that important tidbit.

[QUOTE=Xain777;33180935]Can someone explain to me how the game has improved over Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2? I'm not trying to start anything I just was wondering because every review I have seen lacks that important tidbit.[/QUOTE] It's kind of personal opinion how it's improved. They're rebalanced a ton of killstreaks and perks, so now it's less about being raped by a chopper gunner or who has stopping power and more about what personally works best for you. The story is supposedly better, but I can't really confirm that seeing as how I haven't gotten to the ending yet. They also added a few new gametypes to appeal to different people with different playstyles, and also added a shitload of custom game options which makes MW3 a perfect party game, kind of like Halo or something. It's really hard to say how it's 'improved'. There are a lot of changes, none of them that are really bad. It's just... A different game, really. Pretty much in a nutshell it's like a mix of CoD4 and MW2. If you liked one or the other, you'll like this one a lot.

Well that was the shittiest ending I've seen in a long time. [sp]EVERYONE DIES (except Price, lol), Makarov somehow survives a 6-inch knife being stuck in his throat (which magically heals, you can clearly see his neck's OK later) and a fucking chopper crash, then OH LOOK HE GOT SHOT BEFORE HE COULD SHOOT YOU, HOW ORIGINAL. OH LOOK HE GOT HANGED, SO DRAMATIC. Also quick time events FUCKING EVERYWHERE.[/sp] Fuck, even Black Ops had a better ending, and that was just AMERICA FUCK YEAH, SHIPS AND JETS.

[QUOTE=Grim Joker;33180970]and also added a shitload of custom game options which makes MW3 a perfect party game, kind of like Halo or something.[/QUOTE] This is such a nice touch, really shows that IW/Sledgehammer care about the consumer when they include things like that while other shooters refuse to. I can't get a bunch of bros (internet or real life) together and just play Battlefield 3 without a bunch of hassle or paying money to some server host, but MW3 makes party play so much easier.

[QUOTE=JoeSibilant;33181007]Well that was the shittiest ending I've seen in a long time. [sp]EVERYONE DIES (except Price, lol), Makarov somehow survives a 6-inch knife being stuck in his throat (which magically heals, you can clearly see his neck's OK later) and a fucking chopper crash, then OH LOOK HE GOT SHOT BEFORE HE COULD SHOOT YOU, HOW ORIGINAL. OH LOOK HE GOT HANGED, SO DRAMATIC. Also quick time events FUCKING EVERYWHERE.[/sp] Fuck, even Black Ops had a better ending, and that was just AMERICA FUCK YEAH, SHIPS AND JETS.[/QUOTE] -snip-

[QUOTE=Tommy Gunnerzz;33181015]That wasn't Makarov who got stabbed....[/QUOTE]Yes it was. [sp]Price punches the pilot, and then attacks and stabs Makarov, who is clearly the only other person in that TWO SEATER chopper. Then after the chopper crash he's holding his throat like he just pulled a knife out of it, lol[/sp]

We all remember XboxAhoy? Well, he's back with Day-1 guides! Damn. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dZiQgA5ooI&feature=feedu[/media] They're shorter, which is an.. okay thing. My favorite part about his videos were the attachment guide, but I don't think he does that anymore :c

[QUOTE=PyroCraz3d;33181086]We all remember XboxAhoy? Well, he's back with Day-1 guides! Damn. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dZiQgA5ooI&feature=feedu[/media] They're shorter, which is an.. okay thing. My favorite part about his videos were the attachment guide, but I don't think he does that anymore :c[/QUOTE] "The M4A1 is a versatile carbine that despite it's length...seldom comes up short" Man I missed those.

[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVC4Q3o5p68&feature=feedu[/url] This video is also amazingly detailed and actually sounds like it'll help some people.

Already seeing loads of great video content for MW3. That video was very informative pyro.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;33181257]Already seeing loads of great video content for MW3. That video was very informative pyro.[/QUOTE] Thanks, I found it informative a bit too. Also, the Top 5 MW3 plays are ALREADY turning into quickscope-only clips :l. [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LtQlf-1mrmk&feature=feedu[/url] They should seriously have two seperate top 5s. One top 5 for extraordinary gameplay, NOT quickscoping. And one for quickscoping.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;33179721]Ok this is the CoD thread no one gives a shit about Battlelog.[/QUOTE] Let the guy have his opinion. Nobody gave a shit about your COD ranting in the BF3 thread. He has the right to compare.

[QUOTE=Mr. Agree;33181309]Let the guy have his opinion. Nobody gave a shit about your COD ranting in the BF3 thread. He has the right to compare.[/QUOTE] I've been banned and even I know that he's been trolling the cod thread last night and today, so no, if his opinion is "LOLCOD IS SHIT BF IS BEST", and he flaunts it around in here, we're supposed to let him?

This game seems like the only big game coming out besides Skyrim my PC ran run without dying a firery death. Preordered. [editline]8th November 2011[/editline] wait, seems it's bought. Awesome

[QUOTE=PyroCraz3d;33181320]I've been banned and even I know that he's been trolling the cod thread last night and today, so no, if his opinion is "LOLCOD IS SHIT BF IS BEST", and he flaunts it around in here, we're supposed to let him?[/QUOTE] The post in question was simply talking about the unfair amount of complaints that are heaped onto battlelog and was using the amount of complaints that a similar game's web site got as a comparison. I dont see how that is flaunting it or even close to the opinion that you ascribed to him. Then again I only looked at the post in question and haven't been following this thread so what do I know.