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

Anyone know how I can stop CoD4 multiplayer from crashing on startup?

[QUOTE=windwakr;33184307]I don't see why you guys are complaining so much about the graphics. They're decent. It's not like you are going to be sitting there staring at the floor texture for the whole game.[/QUOTE]They have developed it for 2 years and it's pretty much the same if not worse then MW2. How does that even make sense? What have they been doing all the time? I dunno why but I was actually expecting more. They have a huge budget to work on too, they've had the best selling game for how many years in a row now? It's like they don't even care.

Okay setting image quality to 5 fixed the blur. But still [thumb]http://cloud.steampowered.com/ugc/594701250510318731/81E95FA0CE7213D27DF4CB194AD08667DB571169/[/thumb] Even the source engine does a better job at cubemaps [thumb]http://cloud.steampowered.com/ugc/594701250510324302/ABD8C31F9614282A786C4B72548429F2F5388F99/[/thumb] That just looks so retarded

Here is an other example, and yes I know it's from Xbox but come on, really? [t]http://i.imgur.com/5Y3Pf.jpg[/t] I'm just going too wait and see more videos and see what my friends say. I'm just disappointed it pretty much looks the same as MW1, for a best seller I would expect more.

[QUOTE=Fisk;33184412]They have developed it for 2 years and it's pretty much the same if not worse then MW2. How does that even make sense? What have they been doing all the time? I dunno why but I was actually expecting more. They have a huge budget to work on too, they've had the best selling game for how many years in a row now? It's like they don't even care.[/QUOTE] You say that like it's a fact. It's getting great reviews critically and most of the fanbase agrees that it's atleast a contender for the best CoD game so far.

[QUOTE=windwakr;33184307]I don't see why you guys are complaining so much about the graphics. They're decent. It's not like you are going to be sitting there staring at the floor texture for the whole game.[/QUOTE]Because when people have a 1920x1080 screen they don't want to play the game in 800x600.

Oh god this game looks hideous.

[QUOTE=Chunky kong;33180300]Has anyone used intkeys? I want to believe that I can pick up Modern Warfare 3 for 35 bucks.[/QUOTE] I would NOT recommend IntKeys. I bought MW3 from them, absolutely fucking TERRIBLE support, and it can take them 48 hours or longer to send the keys because they only have 3 fucking people. I'm fed up with them, while I did get my key fast, I'm having all sorts of problems with the game when trying to install ENGLISH localization files because the entire game is in fucking RUSSIAN

[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/ZfIBg.png[/IMG] :v:

[QUOTE=mac338;33184498]Oh god this game looks hideous.[/QUOTE] It isn't.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;33184486]You say that like it's a fact. It's getting great reviews critically and most of the fanbase agrees that it's atleast a contender for the best CoD game so far.[/QUOTE]I generally don't trust fanbases and reviewers since fanbases tend to protect their game pretty hard and reviewers are often just dumb imo. If a lot of people from say, the Battlefield fanbase turn and say it is good however I would reconsider and check it out more. Now I'm talking about the people that bashes CoD and are all like "MW2 suks!".

[QUOTE=Raidyr;33184486]You say that like it's a fact. It's getting great reviews critically and most of the fanbase agrees that it's atleast a contender for the best CoD game so far.[/QUOTE] Of COURSE it's going to get great reviews (from places like IGN and Gamespot, which should tell you enough already). Guess who didn't get copies of MW3? Rock Paper Shotgun and PC FUCKING GAMER. There are no reviews out for the PC version right now. That says something. I have no idea where you're getting the "most of the fanbase" thing, it's getting shit on in Metacritic user reviews and besides, there's ALWAYS going to be fanboys who say "best gaem ever" just like they have for the last four fucking CoD games.

[QUOTE=Fisk;33184523]I generally don't trust fanbases and reviewers since fanbases tend to protect their game pretty hard and reviewers are often just dumb imo. If a lot of people from say, the Battlefield fanbase turn and say it is good however I would reconsider and check it out more. Now I'm talking about the people that bashes CoD and are all like "MW2 suks!".[/QUOTE] "I don't trust people who have played the game before because they might be biased Battlefield fans on the other hand, they know what they are talking about"" No one cares if you reconsider, it's going to be a good game whether you buy it or not. Stop trying to reaffirm your Battlefield 3 purchase.

[QUOTE=salty peanut v2;33184192]well what d'ya know [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekdeN_9CLDM&feature=feedu[/media][/QUOTE] That guy is pretty right.. not going to get this game, just watching him play made me want to play black ops more than MW3 and I don't even like black ops anymore.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;33184486]You say that like it's a fact. It's getting great reviews critically and most of the fanbase agrees that it's atleast a contender for the best CoD game so far.[/QUOTE] Critic reviews are becoming more and more untrustworthy today. OPS3M barely even reviewed it, more sucked the games dick for being "the same old tried and tested formula we played for hours on CoD4 (oh my god guys, did I just heard CoD4? I lurrrrvveeee that game!!!!)". A few hours later, they actually started to "review" it in the form of minor nitpicking. From what I've seen, it doesn't deserve the 9/10, it's managed to create a more broken base than BF3 did. At least when you get a match on BF3, it is generally agreed to be pretty cool and new. But MW3 seems to have people who are tired of it already (video above), or people who are just playing it because it is CoD (almost all fragtard Youtube channels/ high school kids), with few people in between. Activision, IW, Sledgehammer, and whoever the other tag-alongs were [B]need[/B] to start innovating now, their franchise may be the biggest seller, but if the response is anything like I've seen so far, it won't last much longer as it will get stale. Innovation a new killstreak system does not make.

[QUOTE=JoeSibilant;33184560]Of COURSE it's going to get great reviews (from places like IGN and Gamespot, which should tell you enough already). Guess who didn't get copies of MW3? Rock Paper Shotgun and PC FUCKING GAMER. There are no reviews out for the PC version right now. That says something. I have no idea where you're getting the "most of the fanbase" thing, it's getting shit on in Metacritic user reviews and besides, there's ALWAYS going to be fanboys who say "best gaem ever" just like they have for the last four fucking CoD games.[/QUOTE] Yes, because user reviews on Metacritic are THAT reliable. A game as popular as CoD has become is going to have an equally large community of people who hate the game for no reason, hence all the 1/10s you see from people making statements about what video games other people play.

How does it run? I got about 65 fps average on Black Ops (during free weekend), does this game have much difference?

[QUOTE=Raidyr;33184572]"I don't trust people who have played the game before because they might be biased Battlefield fans on the other hand, they know what they are talking about"" No one cares if you reconsider, it's going to be a good game whether you buy it or not. Stop trying to reaffirm your Battlefield 3 purchase.[/QUOTE] It's not so much not trusting people who have played the games before as it is trusting "critics" who have to make good reviews of big games ot keep their funding from those companies, and the fans who will defend it till they die. Impartial, sponsor-less reviewers are what we need more of. People who can give their opinion without worrying about their funding, and people who do not care enough about a franchise to ignore the flaws.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;33184596]Yes, because user reviews on Metacritic are THAT reliable. A game as popular as CoD has become is going to have an equally large community of people who hate the game for no reason, hence all the 1/10s you see from people making statements about what video games other people play.[/QUOTE] Wait, so first you say the fanbase of the game (which is huge, btw) agrees that it's great, then you say user scores don't matter because "there's all them haters out there man" Makes no sense. Also there are plenty of low scores that say basically "I bought every Call of Duty game and this will be the last one I ever buy, fucking terrible." [editline]8th November 2011[/editline] Oh and don't try pulling the whole "OH YOU MUST BE A BF3 FAN, YOUR OPINION IS INVALID" shit with me. BF3 disappointed me and I did not buy it.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;33184572]"I don't trust people who have played the game before because they might be biased Battlefield fans on the other hand, they know what they are talking about"" No one cares if you reconsider, it's going to be a good game whether you buy it or not. Stop trying to reaffirm your Battlefield 3 purchase.[/QUOTE]I'm not reaffirming my BF3 purchase and saying what you quoted. I'm just saying if people that used to hate the game turn and say it is good it will interest me a lot why they suddenly changed. And I don't trust everybody who has played it since most of them will be from the CoD community and say it is good and awesome. And I wouldn't trust the Battlefield community one bit if they came out saying MW3 is bad. If it was reversed however (CoD fan says it is bad, BF fan says it is good) I will be interested in why. I'm just discussing my opinions and shit.

I'm not sure if I should get this. I enjoyed MW1, MW2 and Black Ops, but this looks just like MW2. I mean, even the difference between MW1 and MW2 was bigger than this!

[QUOTE=hexpunK;33184625]It's not so much not trusting people who have played the games before as it is trusting "critics" who have to make good reviews of big games ot keep their funding from those companies, and the fans who will defend it till they die. [b]Impartial, sponsor-less reviewers are what we need more of.[/b] People who can give their opinion without worrying about their funding, and people who do not care enough about a franchise to ignore the flaws.[/QUOTE] Rock Paper Shotgun is the closest thing to that on the PC front. They didn't get a copy of MW3. Big surprise! This is why you don't trust big reviewers, people. They're DEPENDENT on publishers for advance copies and revenue from advertising. That tends to color their reviewing.

[QUOTE=hexpunK;33184589]Critic reviews are becoming more and more untrustworthy today.[/QUOTE] It's funny about that. I remember when BF3 came out an an IGN review got leaked that said 8.0 and the Battlefield thread flipped the fuck out. They couldn't believe that Battlefield 3 had gotten one point less than MW2. It was an outrage! How could anyone trust IGN after that? Turns out the real review was 9.0. All the sudden, replies of "a better review" and "more fair" and "I agree with IGN" on this one. Critical reviews are only untrustworthy when they give ratings to games higher than you personally expected. Do I consider IGN or Gamespot to be the word of the gaming gods, handed down to us from the mountain? Nope. But I don't then turn around and say that "critic reviews" are untrustworthy. When 10 different major publications give the game 8 to 10 out of 10 scores then that just means it's a pretty good game.

[QUOTE=Dlaor-guy;33184653]I'm not sure if I should get this. I enjoyed MW1, MW2 and Black Ops, but this looks just like MW2. I mean, even the difference between MW1 and MW2 was bigger than this![/QUOTE]From what I have heard it is pretty much MW2, or what MW2 should have been. If you play MW2 regularly say up to this day I would probably recommend it.

Is this really a MW2 clone?

[QUOTE=Raidyr;33184692]It's funny about that. I remember when BF3 came out an an IGN review got leaked that said 8.0 and the Battlefield thread flipped the fuck out. They couldn't believe that Battlefield 3 had gotten one point less than MW2. It was an outrage! How could anyone trust IGN after that? Turns out the real review was 9.0. All the sudden, replies of "a better review" and "more fair" and "I agree with IGN" on this one. Critical reviews are only untrustworthy when they give ratings to games higher than you personally expected. Do I consider IGN or Gamespot to be the word of the gaming gods, handed down to us from the mountain? Nope. But I don't then turn around and say that "critic reviews" are untrustworthy. When 10 different major publications give the game 8 to 10 out of 10 scores then that just means it's a pretty good game.[/QUOTE] Why are you going on about BF3 in this thread? What does that have to do with MW3? When review sites are giving 9 or 10 out of 10 for a game that TONS of fans of the franchise are saying "it's the same as MW2," it's not much of a stretch to go "hmm, maybe these reviewers aren't being entirely honest with their opinions."

[QUOTE=mac338;33184515][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/ZfIBg.png[/IMG] :v:[/QUOTE] Average MW3 Review: This one is actually counted on metacritic as a 100 score. [url]http://www.game-boyz.co.uk/content/node/18422[/url]

[QUOTE=Goz3rr;33184071]I have bought both BF3 and MW3, and started playing them with no preference in mind, but i'd really like some hardcore CoD players to explain this: - It took me 5 minutes to get in the first match. Battlelog may be derp but this is even worse - WHAT THE FUCK IS UP WITH THIS BLUR (Highest settings, 4x AA, 1920x1080) [thumb]http://cloud.steampowered.com/ugc/594701250509791677/4F7ABD58C915AD0F33BE1C1BF474F8619B6A89CD/[/thumb] Then, dat texture quality: [thumb]http://cloud.steampowered.com/ugc/594701250509808095/BBB39DEED47BF8FBF9174E883EF1839D5071B0EB/[/thumb] And finally, how can this even happen when you have 4x AA on?? (Look at the barbed wire on the fence) [thumb]http://cloud.steampowered.com/ugc/594701250509795329/67AA2A227D1527BE0F3191CB40794D3B8033AED0/[/thumb] [B]View full size to see what i mean[/B][/QUOTE] Which Modern Warfare are you playing? (I seriously have no idea)

[QUOTE=Raidyr;33184692]It's funny about that. I remember when BF3 came out an an IGN review got leaked that said 8.0 and the Battlefield thread flipped the fuck out. They couldn't believe that Battlefield 3 had gotten one point less than MW2. It was an outrage! How could anyone trust IGN after that? Turns out the real review was 9.0. All the sudden, replies of "a better review" and "more fair" and "I agree with IGN" on this one. Critical reviews are only untrustworthy when they give ratings to games higher than you personally expected. Do I consider IGN or Gamespot to be the word of the gaming gods, handed down to us from the mountain? Nope. But I don't then turn around and say that "critic reviews" are untrustworthy. When 10 different major publications give the game 8 to 10 out of 10 scores then that just means it's a pretty good game.[/QUOTE]What flipped my balls was that they had given BF3 a lower score in Graphics and sound than MW2. I haven't seen the newer reviews tough but wouldn't trust it anyway.

[QUOTE=stepat201;33184729]Which Modern Warfare are you playing? (I seriously have no idea)[/QUOTE]It's MW3, the blur gives it away.