[Moogs]

Won't get it on Mac initially but it is out on PC from Day 1 which means Aspyr should do a port within 6-12 months hopefully. Sucks still being second glass game citizen. Oh well. Looks worth the wait. Just hope the design it for Lion from the start, newer Mac GPUs like 5770.

http://www.callofduty.com/mw3

[RowdyScot]

Shouldn't this be in GamingNova?

[Eugene]

It should, plus this is the same old engine being stretched beyond its limits. BF3 isn't strictly an FPS due to vehicle elements, but it looks so much better thanks to Frostbite 2. You simply cannot compare the latest MW3 trailer to this. Having played the beta of BF3 extensively, you can get a full COD experience out of the non-vehicle maps as well.

[torifile]

If I'm to play another FPS-ish game, it will be BF3. MW2 killed the MW experience for me.

[Quagmire]

Originally Posted by torifile If I'm to play another FPS-ish game, it will be BF3. MW2 killed the MW experience for me.

I am curious why? I loved MW2( better than MW1, IMHO).

I can't wait until MW3 comes out. It looks to be a good ending to the storyline.

While BF3's graphics blow MW3's out of the water, I am in MW3 for the storyline.

[Eugene]

Originally Posted by Quagmire While BF3's graphics blow MW3's out of the water, I am in MW3 for the storyline.

All three hours of storyline, because that seems like roughly how long it takes to get through the campaigns. I liked the original CoD's campaign for the story, but I only ever played through it twice. For me, an FPS needs a decent multiplayer because that's going to be where the most hours are spent.

[Quagmire]

Originally Posted by Eugene All three hours of storyline, because that seems like roughly how long it takes to get through the campaigns. I liked the original CoD's campaign for the story, but I only ever played through it twice. For me, an FPS needs a decent multiplayer because that's going to be where the most hours are spent.

I like MW2's multiplayer. Granted I only play free for all since any of the team based-modes you can hardly call these people a team. They still look out for themselves and their own freaking stats.

Once you get into a good room on free for all, it can be fun. But, that is the problem. Most of the time you get into a room full of people who care only about their stats, getting a nuke, winning, etc. So they camp or rely on the noob tube. I just want to have fun. I want to do well, but winning isn't my priority. Once you get into that rare room, it can be fun. Just have to be patient.

But, the biggest problem to any team/strategy based game is most of these people don't have mics. You can't coordinate with them. Take for instance Battlestations Midway. Most of the time I can beat the Americans( I tend to play on the Japanese side) without help from my teammates. But, it just makes it extremely harder. Even when you have a team with people having mics, they still want to do their own thing. Take for instance on one map, it is won by the ships. The planes are there for air superiority and support the ships. But, they don't want to do that so they try to sink the carriers, but get shot down and they let dive bombers destroy our shipyards, etc and now we lost. Battlefield seems to be one of the rare games that you can still work as a team even if you can't communicate with your team members.

[torifile]

I LOVED MW's multi-player. It was the only game I have ever spent any time in online. And I spent a lot of time in it. Sure, I never got very good or had a clan or whatever but I really enjoyed it. I never felt as though most people were just in it for the stats - when I played team-based games, it really felt like a team-based game.

In MW2, it felt very every-man-for-himself. It never captured my imagination like MW1 did. I was hoping it would - hell, I even partly built my hackintosh so I could play the game at max settings. I was sorely disappointed when it didn't have the magic of the first one. (I think I was totally turned off by the airport scene so I didn't even get into the campaign mode.)

[Quagmire]

Oh come on, No Russian was the best mission. Can come home from a stressful day and just shoot without anyone shooting back( until the end of course). Good stress reliever. haha

[dmegatool]

Originally Posted by Quagmire Battlefield seems to be one of the rare games that you can still work as a team even if you can't communicate with your team members.

MAG is just as great if not better in that aspect (I guess. I'm no BF fan... Just played BF3 beta). It's a PS3 exclusive though...

You get objectives assigned by your squad leader and it's so rewarding to do them that people actually do. A kill is 5xp, reviving a buddy is 10xp. If you're close to the objective it's double xp. So reviving a teammate close to the objective equal 4 kills for a loner going his way. There's only 3 factions and you can't switch* so you develop a certain feeling of membership (don't know if it's the right word here.)

I hate MW individualism. Probably gonna get BF3 for the team spirit.

*Actually you can switch when you reach the max level for you character. Adds a little star to your name you're back at the beginning... Level 0.

[torifile]

Originally Posted by Quagmire Oh come on, No Russian was the best mission. Can come home from a stressful day and just shoot without anyone shooting back( until the end of course). Good stress reliever. haha

I know you're sorta kidding but that's not exactly my cup of tea. I don't mind shooting up others who are shooting at me but I have a hard time when the premise is to do it to someone who's most definitely not. Anyway, I didn't play the SP campaign because I didn't want to be in that position. And I really don't like the message it sends (a reason I don't play any of the GTA games).

Regardless, all the drama at Activision/Infinity Ward has me convinced the game is going to suck. And they might start charging for online play? No thanks.

[Quagmire]

Originally Posted by torifile I know you're sorta kidding but that's not exactly my cup of tea. I don't mind shooting up others who are shooting at me but I have a hard time when the premise is to do it to someone who's most definitely not. Anyway, I didn't play the SP campaign because I didn't want to be in that position. And I really don't like the message it sends (a reason I don't play any of the GTA games). Regardless, all the drama at Activision/Infinity Ward has me convinced the game is going to suck. And they might start charging for online play? No thanks.

I do like Whiskey Hotel better, but I don't mind No Russian. It's a game. All the parents and groups that sued/moaned/etc had to do is not buy the game for their freaking kids. "Oh my precious Little Jimmy is 8 year olds and I don't want him to play a game like that". I hate those kind of parents. Would rather sue Infinity Ward to tone down a mature game( it's rated M for a freaking reason idiots) than say no to their precious angel.

I can go on about how stupid parenting is today, but don't like that mission? Don't buy the game or skip it. They give the option to skip it for that reason. I don't have an issue with it. It's a mission in a game that is a part of the storyline. Hell, you don't even have to fire the gun. Just have to walk and follow the group.

[Quagmire]

That was a good conclusion to the Modern Warfare storyline.

But, sad for the character that died.