Call Of Duty MW3 Dev Begs for Help With Low Metacritic User Score - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Raidyr;33268785]Which part? The part where the developer asks fans of the game to leave honest feedback because he feels the user rating on Metacritic is being abused? Or the part where people on Facepunch confirm that theory by outright telling us that they are registering just to zero it, and, ironically, invalidating the very essence of the user rating system by rigging it?[/QUOTE]One guy did that. Calm down. Shit re-release of a re-release is shit. Let's move on. I am halfway through the campaign and so far the game has been trying to wow me with all of the shit it already fired at me in the two other Modern Warfares. I'm happy as hell that a friends friend gave me this game for free. Call of Duty is p. much dull now. They're not trying to push the envelope in this one. It's just a retread and god knows we shouldn't have expected anything different considering infinity-gate last year.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;33268785]Which part? The part where the developer asks fans of the game to leave honest feedback because he feels the user rating on Metacritic is being abused? Or the part where people on Facepunch confirm that theory by outright telling us that they are registering just to zero it, and, ironically, invalidating the very essence of the user rating system by rigging it?[/QUOTE] It's because everyone is this fucking thread is acting like they're asses are on fire

[QUOTE=Juniez;33266876]a. yes you can, watch -pics-[/QUOTE] So what you're saying is The Elder Scrolls is an FPS.

I love it when people want a [b]sequel[/b] to be completely different from the prequel and then bash it probably without even playing it and disregarding everything new the game might even had.

[QUOTE=dass;33269775]I love it when people want a [b]sequel[/b] to be completely different from the prequel and then bash it probably without even playing it and [B]disregarding everything new the game might even had.[/B][/QUOTE] That's the thing. There is nothing new. In a few weeks all of the playerbase will gravitate to a select amount of multiplayer builds.

[QUOTE=Chirno;33269138]So what you're saying is The Elder Scrolls is an FPS.[/QUOTE] Yes it is, but only because we have shit descriptors for genres in games. It is a First-Person-Shooter but it isn't a game with a setting in the modern day military, a focus on Gunplay, and a first-person-veiwpoint.

[QUOTE=PunchedInFac;33269869]That's the thing. There is nothing new. In a few weeks all of the playerbase will gravitate to a select amount of multiplayer builds.[/QUOTE] Strictly multiplayer speaking: New weapons, attachments, perks, maps, gamemodes, killstreaks, and the new pointstreak system which is the largest fundamental change to CoD since CoD4's introduction of Create A Class. Sure everyone will pick up on the better stuff but that happens in every competitive game, even one's as intensely balanced as DotA and Counter Strike. [editline]14th November 2011[/editline] Honestly Team Defender was worth the $60 pricetag alone. It takes the fast kill-happy gameplay of TDM and combines it with a heavy emphasis on teamwork. Every time I play it it's a close game as both sides frenetically try to kill and guard the flag respectively.

[QUOTE=Xain777;33270115]Yes it is, but only because we have shit descriptors for genres in games. It is a First-Person-Shooter but it isn't a game with a setting in the modern day military, a focus on Gunplay, and a first-person-veiwpoint.[/QUOTE]First Person Shooter generically applies to any game played in First Person with combat, it doesn't need to be military or gunbased at all.

So basically everyone is butthurt that they've been using the same content for a few years, when Valve has been using the same textures, sounds, weapons, and models since HL2 was released? Not to mention the only new things they've added are particles, one whole enemy, and one weapon that isn't even included in the game without cheats.

Frankly, I don't really mind Call of Duty. The major thing that bugs me is their publisher's exploitation of controversy and fanbase. The games are pretty fun as just that, as games, but I don't want my money to support technological stagnation and annual (or monthly, if you take their DLCs to that) repetition. If the games were maybe half as expensive, I wouldn't mind them at all.

Alright, so I just went and played it, and holy shit it's kind of terrible like, I mean, you know what you're getting and I said MW 2.5 a few times already but jesus fucking christ I didn't imagine it was this bad [editline]14th November 2011[/editline] like, the PC version has "your NAT type is" on the game match screen the whole thing felt more like Halo on the 360 than any computer game I've ever played also reporting is completely worthless on PC thanks again dickheads voting 0 because if they'd hire the same amount of monkeys as 'devs' they would get the exact result, and save whatever millions they spent 'making' it [editline]14th November 2011[/editline] The only reason I'm not more pissed off at this shoddy imitation of a game is that I only paid $19 for it, probably from some russians who got it out the back of a truck If I'd paid $70 I'd be furious [editline]14th November 2011[/editline] furthermore, I've never even played MW2 so all this is in reference to COD4 and MW3's similarities

[QUOTE=JustGman;33270209]So basically everyone is butthurt that they've been using the same content for a few years, when Valve has been using the same textures, sounds, weapons, and models since HL2 was released? Not to mention the only new things they've added are particles, one whole enemy, and one weapon that isn't even included in the game without cheats.[/QUOTE] Right, but at the same token HL2's expansions were episodes and not full games and continued the story while bringing subtle but gorgeous engine upgrades. And they weren't asking for full price on those either. It's not that the CoD games are rehashed that's the problem, it's that they're rehashing them for full price with really no real changes. Different guns and maps only go so far.

[QUOTE=Protocol7;33271745]Right, but at the same token HL2's expansions were episodes and not full games and continued the story while bringing subtle but gorgeous engine upgrades. And they weren't asking for full price on those either. It's not that the CoD games are rehashed that's the problem, it's that they're rehashing them for full price with really no real changes. Different guns and maps only go so far.[/QUOTE] I think he was less focusing on the Episodes (though those count as well) and more on every Valve game since HL2.

[QUOTE=JustGman;33270209]So basically everyone is butthurt that they've been using the same content for a few years, when Valve has been using the same textures, sounds, weapons, and models since HL2 was released? Not to mention the only new things they've added are particles, one whole enemy, and one weapon that isn't even included in the game without cheats.[/QUOTE] Most of their games though actually vary in gameplay and if they don't then it's not a full priced game (excluding L4D2)

[QUOTE=dass;33269775]I love it when people want a [b]sequel[/b] to be completely different from the prequel and then bash it probably without even playing it and disregarding everything new the game might even had.[/QUOTE] But I did play it. And it sucked.

I like call of duty now. I like how all the ten year olds go there to play, and the normal people can play battlefield. Why can't we all just get along; let the ten year olds quikscop3 each other while we have fun on bf? Seriously, I really liked cod until cod6, and then I hated it. But I still respect that people like it and I suppose that it's better that the CoD community stays in CoD so it doesn't infect the generally normal BF community. I think that advertising BF3 so widely is going to be the downfall of it; no one will play it if the 10 year olds come from mw3, after realising its mw2 repackaged.

[QUOTE=JustGman;33270209]So basically everyone is butthurt that they've been using the same content for a few years, when Valve has been using the same textures, sounds, weapons, and models since HL2 was released? Not to mention the only new things they've added are particles, one whole enemy, and one weapon that isn't even included in the game without cheats.[/QUOTE] Last time I checked the Half-Life episodes aren't priced 60€ each.

[QUOTE=DwarfOverlord;33383534]I like call of duty now. I like how all the ten year olds go there to play, and the normal people can play battlefield. Why can't we all just get along; let the ten year olds quikscop3 each other while we have fun on bf? Seriously, I really liked cod until cod6, and then I hated it. But I still respect that people like it and I suppose that it's better that the CoD community stays in CoD so it doesn't infect the generally normal BF community. I think that advertising BF3 so widely is going to be the downfall of it; no one will play it if the 10 year olds come from mw3, after realising its mw2 repackaged.[/QUOTE] Because everyone on cod is a 10 y old and the bf community is full of grown people who don't act like jackasses at all.

[QUOTE=dass;33383894]Because everyone on cod is a 10 y old and the bf community is full of grown people who don't act like jackasses at all.[/QUOTE] This situation is awfully similar to Halo's popularity, 8 years ago. Remember when people used to say "[B]everyone on Halo is a 10 y old[/B]" Now it is COD turn to suffer the fate Halo once went through

Because both are popular games about things little boys find cool.

[IMG]http://puu.sh/97WE[/IMG] What? Why is it even that high?

[QUOTE=BCell;33385897]This situation is awfully similar to Halo's popularity, 8 years ago. Remember when people used to say "[B]everyone on Halo is a 10 y old[/B]" Now it is COD turn to suffer the fate Halo once went through[/QUOTE] on xbox and ps3 maybe. I don't get even half the shit people talk about on PC.

Now that i take a look at the score at metacritic, it's around 89 on all platforms.... Oh shit that was the review score not the user score.

[QUOTE=Spacewolf;33212684]Why are there only 4 critic reviews on PC but over 50 on Xbox?[/QUOTE] They didn't add it to steam press accounts, so a few sites didn't review it for that reason. [editline]22nd November 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=dass;33383894]Because everyone on cod is a 10 y old and the bf community is full of grown people who don't act like jackasses at all.[/QUOTE] PC games benefit a lot from younger players being less likely to own headsets. with xbox live, pretty much everyone has one.

double post, ignore

[QUOTE=Kastrenzo;33605936]double post, ignore[/QUOTE] RIP Kastrenzo.

this thread is a great example of "STOP LIKING WHAT I DON'T LIKE!!!!!"

Resurrecting shit thread.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;33606489]Resurrecting shit thread.[/QUOTE] Why?

[QUOTE=Raidyr;33606489]Resurrecting shit thread.[/QUOTE] contributing to the resurrection of a shit thread about a shit dev who helped make a shit game