# Modern Warfare 3 Sets Record for Biggest Entertainment Launch



## qubit (Nov 11, 2011)

Shattering its own day-one sales records, Activision Publishing, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Activision Blizzard, announced that its highly-anticipated Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 has become the biggest entertainment launch ever with an estimated sell-through of more than $400 million and more than 6.5 million units in North America and the United Kingdom alone in the first 24 hours of its release, according to Charttrack and retail customer sell-through information.

This marks the third consecutive year that the Call of Duty franchise has set day one launch records across all forms of entertainment, something no other entertainment franchise in any medium has ever accomplished. Last year, in North America and the United Kingdom , Activision's Call of Duty: Black Ops had estimated day-one sell-through of $360 million and in 2009, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, set day-one records with estimated sell through of $310 million, according to Charttrack and retail customer sell-through information.

On November 8, 2011, millions of fans attended more than 13,000 midnight openings at retail stores worldwide. According to Microsoft, after just two days, the number of gamers playing simultaneously on Xbox Live set a new peak concurrency record.



"We believe the launch of Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 is the biggest entertainment launch of all time in any medium, and we achieved this record with sales from only two territories," said Bobby Kotick, CEO, Activision Blizzard, Inc. "Other than Call of Duty, there has never been another entertainment franchise that has set opening day records three years in a row. Life-to-date sales for the Call of Duty franchise exceed worldwide theatrical box office for "Star Wars" and "Lord of the Rings", two of the most successful entertainment franchises of all time."

Eric Hirshberg, CEO, Activision Publishing added, "Call of Duty is more than a game. It's become a major part of the pop cultural landscape. It is a game that core enthusiasts love, but that also consistently draws new people into the medium. It is the most intense, adrenaline pumping entertainment experience anywhere. I would like to thank our incredible teams at Infinity Ward and Sledgehammer Games for making a brilliant game. But most of all, I would like to thank our millions of passionate fans worldwide. We made this game for you."

Separately, Activision announced this morning that in support and gratitude for the efforts of American servicemen and women, this Veterans Day it donated $3 million to the Call of Duty Endowment, a non-profit, public benefit corporation that seeks to provide job placement and training for veterans. This latest donation will be added to the $2 million that Activision has already donated to the Endowment, which has provided more than $1.5 million in grants and scholarships to veterans' organizations across the country since it was conceived by Bobby Kotick in November of 2009.

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 is rated "M" (Mature) by the ESRB for Blood and Gore, Drug Reference, Intense Violence and Strong Language and is available now for the Xbox 360 video game and entertainment system from Microsoft, PlayStation3 computer entertainment system, and Windows PC. For more information visit www.callofduty.com/mw3 and www.callofduty.com/elite

*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## Wrigleyvillain (Nov 11, 2011)

...I'll just hold my tongue. Or fingers, as it were.


----------



## Marineborn (Nov 11, 2011)

baaaaaaaaaah....and there go the sheep


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Nov 11, 2011)

It's the iPhone of the games world, are we surprised?

I have a lot of console only gamers and seriously they wouldn't have a clue when it came to PC gaming and thought gaming began with the PS2 and Xbox :shadedshu


----------



## 3volvedcombat (Nov 11, 2011)

I traded in a bunch of my old games (including blackops) for a strait trade on mw3 that was about 35-40 hours after release. (ps3)

I have to say, even though the graphics are not improved, the game play is solid, I have never played or bought mw2, so this is my "mw2". 

Its got a nice campaign where you swing out of spinning copters once again .

Its a solid game, and I actually love how they perked up everything.
Deathstreaks
Spec tactical perk streaks
assault streaks
defensive streaks 
perks + pro's
gun perks 

There is a perk on everything, it lets me fine tune what I really want to achieve with a class, and its pretty fun. 

But going from blackop's to this, I say it was worth it, for me, more shit to customize and waste my life on.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Nov 11, 2011)

What grabbed my attention was the lack of marketing needed to reach such estimated sales.  Most of that will in fact be just profit and, won't we subtracted from the amount of money used to market the game.


----------



## Frick (Nov 11, 2011)

Marineborn said:


> baaaaaaaaaah....and there go the sheep



Just be quiet.



EastCoasthandle said:


> What grabbed my attention was the lack of marketing needed to reach such estimated sales.  Most of that will in fact be just profit and, won't we subtracted from the amount of money used to market the game.



I'm not that surprised, CoD is so big it's a bit beyond marketing.


----------



## cheesy999 (Nov 11, 2011)

EastCoasthandle said:


> What grabbed my attention was the lack of marketing needed to reach such estimated sales.  Most of that will in fact be just profit and, won't we subtracted from the amount of money used to market the game.



It was different in the UK, there was a lot of marketing

The Website for game, has one of those scrolling featured game section like steam, for the week leading up to it's release, every single slot was dedicated to call of duty, Even my local Tesco had a Display dedicated to call of duty


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Nov 11, 2011)

The first Call of Duty was practically the same as, but inferior to, Medal of Honor.  Yet, it isn't Medal of Honor that EA fixes, it's Battlefield.  EA makes no sense.


I wonder how many sales Skyrim is/has pulled in.

Still, 6.5 million is less than the 9 million they "expected."





EastCoasthandle said:


> What grabbed my attention was the lack of marketing needed to reach such estimated sales.  Most of that will in fact be just profit and, won't we subtracted from the amount of money used to market the game.


It's marketing was conducted on Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2.  They didn't need more marketing to sell to those sad PS3 owners that preordered MW3 the moment it was available for preorder.


----------



## Athlon2K15 (Nov 12, 2011)

simply put a badass game.


----------



## kid41212003 (Nov 12, 2011)

EastCoasthandle said:


> It's no wonder they are already working on MW4, they already have the funding for it.  It goes to show you that a fun game does indeed sell.  And mostly through word of mouth and popularity instead of spending millions on marketing.  It looks like, to me, that having fun triumphs anything that is not perceived by the consumer as important.



Yes, it's something cool to have and do nowadays among teenagers.

Battlefield simple can't compete with COD because it targets older player, and we --older player-- just don't have all day sitting around talking about how cool cool things are and hyping ourselves, turning so-so game into the greatest game of all time.

Typical American tardness.

That's why most of 99% of American can't even vote to help themselves against the wealthiest 1%.




FordGT90Concept said:


> It's marketing was conducted on Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2.  They didn't need more marketing to sell to those sad PS3 owners that preordered MW3 the moment it was available for preorder.



I think they sold more copies on Xbox360 than any other platforms.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Nov 12, 2011)

kid41212003 said:


> Yes, it's something cool to have and do nowadays among teenagers.
> 
> Battlefield simple can't compete with COD because it targets older player, and we --older player-- just don't have all day sitting around talking about how cool cool things are and hyping ourselves, turning so-so game into the greatest game of all time.
> 
> ...



Lets be fair, BF3 needs to be fixed on many fronts.  
-C2D issues
-game always crashing on 1st launch
-randomly kicked from the server
-activation issues
-memory issues
-stuttering issues
-orange/red/green flashing issues
-tedious use of Origin + FF/Chrome + plugins just to play BF3
-etc

While MW3 doesn't have such issues.  Although not perfect their game day launch was pretty typical of what one would expect from a game.  Perhaps that may have played a part of why it sold so well and it's still being played by many. 

Having said as such, it's not the technical merits of BF3 why it doesn't compete with MW3.  Neither was it do to the amount of marketing.  It's the perception of how people see products from EA and how they see products from Activision.   It appears that they trust Activision more.  And so far, they are getting what they are expecting from them.  Can the same be said about EA?   Or will the response be "you need a 64 bit OS"?


----------



## qubit (Nov 12, 2011)

This must be terrible news for MW3's anti-fans.  For the record, I don't have any particular preference. I just find all the anti CoD bitching on TPU ironically funny.

Here's a handy article comparing sales figures for MW3 & BF3. In short, MW3 beat a whole week's worth of BF3 sales! Astonishing.

http://www.gamingtarget.com/article.php?artid=12610


----------



## Athlon2K15 (Nov 12, 2011)

because its better,lol


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Nov 12, 2011)

I won't mention any names to protect the innocent, but thanks to a certain news editor, I have this game. I don't think it deserves the bad reputation that a lot of people are giving it because I am having a good time with it. I am spending equal time with this and BF3 and I think that they coexist nicely.

Congrats to Activision for making more money in a day than I'll see in my lifetime.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Nov 12, 2011)

I believe that many of the elements from BF2 did in fact hurt the sales of BF3.  Such as:
-no real squad leader that can give orders/way points
-no commander
-no in game voip
-no in game ping
-way to many assets to unlock
-huge chat box 
-flashlight and sun too bright, too much blue tint and the contrast is to high
just to name a few.  What I'm getting at is those elements that made BF, BF.  Then people had to fight them just to get a broken command rose that doesn't have ammo/medic request.  Then they had to fight them to get squads half way decent.  You still can't name your own squad, kick/request people to join, etc.  
-no mod tools
-no spectator mod
-chat box should be similar to Bf2/BC2 were teammates are one color, squad mates are one color and enemies are another color
-no battle recorder

Although a long list, they did fix the hit registration .  But one thing I loved about conquest from BF2 was that you had to capture enemy flags.  That is what true conquest was for me.  And it was done in a way were you would inevitably come face to face with your opponent.  When defending you had the pick of the litter of where you wanted to spawn.  This is what the current maps don't offer when in conquest.  Although metro comes close it's sectioned off.

Like I said, when you play MW3 you know what you are getting.


----------



## kid41212003 (Nov 12, 2011)

EastCoasthandle said:


> Lets be fair, BF3 needs to be fixed on many fronts.
> 
> While MW3 doesn't have such issues.  Although not perfect their game day launch was pretty typical of what one would expect from a game.  Perhaps that may have played a part of why it sold so well and it's still being played by many.
> 
> Having said as such, it's not the technical merits of BF3 why it doesn't compete with MW3.  Neither was it do to the amount of marketing.  It's the perception of how people see products from EA and how they see products from Activision.   It appears that they trust Activision more.  And so far, they are getting what they are expecting from them.  Can the same be said about EA?   Or will the response be "you need a 64 bit OS"?



I don't think it's the trust issue here.

A good game in BF3 requires teamwork. People must know what they need to do for it to be fully enjoyable, but that's why BF community like it -- a team based game, and sadly that isn't appeal to younger players (the majority of gamers). 

COD - i think you know well what it is

I ignore BF3's bugs because they are bugs, and bugs will always be fixed, and so far in my experiences, all of them have been fixed. I don't like the idea of battlelog, but i don't have problems with it now. 

And with the scale of BF3 and its new engine, bugs are to be expected while COD games have been being built in a same engine which is why the game has little to no bug visible.

And because BF3 requires an expensive PC to fully enjoy the game, most people can't really afford that. If you look at the sale figure for the past COD games, most of them were sold on the 360... I'm pretty sure it will be the same with MW3.

It would be fine if they were to sell it at $40 or less as an expansion, but they are not. I'm simple angry at how they do their business and how ignorance people are time after time. Yes i know it's sensible as a business to make money, but we're as consumers must not let them think we're retards.

COD will set an example of what a gamer is because of how successful it is, but do we as gamers really want that? I'm offended.


----------



## erocker (Nov 12, 2011)

EastCoasthandle said:


> Like I said, when you play MW3 you know what you are getting.



Exactly. I don't always play arcade-ish shooters, but when I do, I prefer to play MW2.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Nov 12, 2011)

kid41212003 said:


> I don't think it's the trust issue here.
> 
> A good game in BF3 requires teamwork. People must know what they need to do for it to be fully enjoyable, but that's why BF community like it -- a team based game, and sadly that isn't appeal to younger players (the majority of gamers).
> 
> ...



In order to have team work you have to have a set of guidelines in order to have complete cohesion.
1. Structure of command.  That means having a commander that order squad leaders and squad leaders to order the grunts.  
2.  Communication.  People need a means to communicate with each other while in the same squad in order to understand what objectives will be accomplished.  For this to work properly the commander gives order to the squad leader and/or the squad leader delegates them to his squad mates while he stands back being a spawn point.  
3.  Clear objectives that are not sectioned off depending on what portion of the map you are on.  Or so far away requiring a vehicle that is not readily available.  That means that flag/mcom placement should be in such a way that gives a clear line of sight of where most of the team is heading for.  

Ignoring the bugs BF3 has is part of the problem and why it simply didn't do well against MW3 it was competing against.  An obvious bad mistake.  Fit and polish goes a long way of someone opinion of the game.  It, imo, has a greater impact on a person's perception then just the game's graphics.  Unless, that is also an issue, cough high contrast.  

And lets be real, many don't like or simply hate battlelog and origin.  Telling people that they can only join a server via web browser is simply not something that should have happen and I doubt we will see that in BF4.  

To end, people just don't care about a game's engine as proven by MW3 sales.  What they care about is how intuitive and fun a game is to play.  You don't need to open other application to play it and you aren't missing standard features everyone looks for (voip, in game ping to name a few).


----------



## ShRoOmAlIsTiC (Nov 12, 2011)

biggest thing to hurt bf3 in this comparing is the lack of steam sales.  that would have had a big jump on the sales of bf3 so its not that bf3 is a bad game its the way EA handled selling it.


----------



## kid41212003 (Nov 12, 2011)

EastCoasthandle said:


> In order to have team work you have to have a set of guidelines in order to have complete cohesion.
> 1. Structure of command.  That means having a commander that order squad leaders and squad leaders to order the grunts.
> 2.  Communication.  People need a means to communicate with each other while in the same squad in order to understand what objectives will be accomplished.  For this to work properly the commander gives order to the squad leader and/or the squad leader delegates them to his squad mates while he stands back being a spawn point.
> 3.  Clear objectives that are not sectioned off depending on what portion of the map you are on.  Or so far away requiring a vehicle that is not readily available.  That means that flag/mcom placement should be in such a way that gives a clear line of sight of where most of the team is heading for.
> ...



I agree with most of your points, but staying at one place because it's comfortable doesn't mean we can't try to get something better. I hate COD not because it's a bad game, but because of Activision's way of abusing it.

Majority speaks, but that's not necessary always right. We used to believe earth is flat.

I think I've stated my points in the earlier post, so there's nothing more for me to say.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Nov 12, 2011)

ShRoOmAlIsTiC said:


> biggest thing to hurt bf3 in this comparing is the lack of steam sales.  that would have had a big jump on the sales of bf3 so its not that bf3 is a bad game its the way EA handled selling it.



Excellent point! Preventing BF3 from Steam certainly didn't help their cause to compete with MW3.  I wonder if we will see it on Steam now?


----------



## MilkyWay (Nov 12, 2011)

@EastCoasthandle - Its spit and polish, like to polish your boots, it means something has a neat and tidiness about it.

EDIT: People dont know any better because all they play is rubbish games or just popular ones. People who dont know what good beer because all they drink is macro lagers.


----------



## qubit (Nov 12, 2011)

EastCoasthandle said:


> Excellent point! Preventing BF3 from Steam certainly didn't help their cause to compete with MW3.  I wonder if we will see it on Steam now?



I sure hope so. I would have bought it by now if it was on Steam.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Nov 12, 2011)

MilkyWay said:


> Its spit and polish, like to polish your boots, it means something has a neat and tidiness about it.



Yeah thanks for the reminder but I'm aware of that.  I use "fit" to mean the condition the game is in for us, the users.


----------



## AlienIsGOD (Nov 12, 2011)

i didn't know recycled manure was worth 400 million dollars 

In all seriousness tho, I dont get why a company as big as Activison feels the need to put out a game thats dated IMO (DX9 only) and reusues models and then boast about it all day long....


----------



## kid41212003 (Nov 12, 2011)

AlienIsGOD said:


> i didn't know recycled manure was worth 400 million dollars
> 
> In all seriousness tho, I dont get why a company as big as Activison feels the need to put out a game thats dated IMO (DX9 only) and reusues models and then boast about it all day long....



Because it's already polished and there will be no problem meeting dead line or optimizing for consoles.


----------



## AlienIsGOD (Nov 12, 2011)

kid41212003 said:


> Because it's already polished and there will be no problem meeting dead line or optimizing for consoles.



Ya I see that, this shoddy practice has moved to WoW to since the merger......


----------



## 3volvedcombat (Nov 12, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> I won't mention any names to protect the innocent, but thanks to a certain news editor, I have this game. I don't think it deserves the bad reputation that a lot of people are giving it because I am having a good time with it. I am spending equal time with this and BF3 and I think that they coexist nicely.
> 
> Congrats to Activision for making more money in a day than I'll see in my lifetime.



+1. 
I feel in the middle, I traded some old tiresome games for MW3 strait trade.
Compared to blackops, mw3 has a nice bit of multiplayer with perks and even more perks. I have to say mutliplayer customization is about 30-40% more then previous COD titles.

Single player, I have just beat 5 minutes before posting this, was decent to, I actually liked the intense 24/7 "your going to get your ass fucked up" gameplay. The end is always pretty nice, wonder if price dies 

I was trolling this game, considering it worthless, but as the next day I started up blackops and basically new I was bored to shit with it, so I moved on. Holidays are coming so I can 
restock on games . 

Its an 7-8/10 for Regular COD players, just live with the run n gun for now, it has to change. 
8-9/10 for someone who has never touched COD which would be some young ones right now.

It was worth it to me, prob for the lack of cash exchange in getting it


----------



## pr0n Inspector (Nov 12, 2011)

Why must everyone care about what you care? Why are they idiots for not caring about what you care? It's a game, so who the hell are you to call others idiots for having fun in a game you don't like?

/rant


----------



## fritoking (Nov 12, 2011)

pr0n Inspector said:


> Why must everyone care about what you care? Why are they idiots for not caring about what you care? It's a game, so who the hell are you to call others idiots for having fun in a game you don't like?
> 
> /rant



i agree.....i am actually liking it quite abit


----------



## Fx (Nov 12, 2011)

qubit said:


> This must be terrible news for MW3's anti-fans.  For the record, I don't have any particular preference. I just find all the anti CoD bitching on TPU ironically funny.
> 
> Here's a handy article comparing sales figures for MW3 & BF3. In short, MW3 beat a whole week's worth of BF3 sales! Astonishing.
> 
> http://www.gamingtarget.com/article.php?artid=12610



+1



pr0n Inspector said:


> Why must everyone care about what you care? Why are they idiots for not caring about what you care? It's a game, so who the hell are you to call others idiots for having fun in a game you don't like?
> 
> /rant



+1

I dont know why so many on here assume that everyone that enjoys the CoD series plays it on a console or even owns one for that matter then proceeds to bash CoD fans because it doesnt fit their taste

justify your satisfaction of BF all you want to make yourself feel better. I find it retarded that you have to make things as if they are love/hate between these two franchises

they are two different gameplay styles and I am glad I bought both


----------



## MilkyWay (Nov 12, 2011)

I just cant see why people buy it year after year when it hardly changes. A map pack or DLC expansion would suffice.


----------



## entropy13 (Nov 12, 2011)

But apparently there were MORE Skyrim players (peak) than MW3 Multiplayer and MW3 Single Player combined.









Is that from Steam though? Well I guess that means only on the PC anyway.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Nov 12, 2011)

entropy13 said:


> But apparently there were MORE Skyrim players (peak) than MW3 Multiplayer and MW3 Single Player combined.
> 
> 
> http://img717.imageshack.us/img717/7636/skyrimvsmw3.jpg
> ...



You do realize that would make it higher then BF3?
I never seen BF3 reach a player count over 220k


----------



## entropy13 (Nov 12, 2011)

Well at least there are a lot of FM2012 players out there besides me.


----------



## AsRock (Nov 12, 2011)

Marineborn said:


> baaaaaaaaaah....and there go the sheep



I was thinking there must be so many brain dead people but sheep is pretty fitting lol.


----------



## btarunr (Nov 12, 2011)

NdMk2o1o said:


> It's the iPhone of the games world, are we surprised?



No, it's the Justin Bieber of the games world.


----------



## RejZoR (Nov 12, 2011)

I wanted to buy it and then it was too bloody expensive. 53 EUR in a local retail shop and 59,99 EUR on Steam. Are they on crack? Maybe marijoana? It has to be something strong...
I might pay 40 EUR for a new game but 50+ ? I'll pass till it gets below 40 EUR and since it will be very old by then, i'll wait till it's 20 EUR and then i'll buy.

First they'll brag about selling numbers and then complain over piracy. IT'S TOO BLOODY EXPENSIVE YOU WANKERS!


----------



## xenocide (Nov 12, 2011)

RejZoR said:


> I'll pass till it gets below 40 EUR and since it will be very old by then, i'll wait till it's 20 EUR and then i'll buy.



So you'll play it in 2015, since MW2 just recently dipped below $60 on Steam. Activision is very strict with their pricing when it comes to PC (or even consoles) and their games pricing.


----------



## RejZoR (Nov 12, 2011)

Then i'll never buy it and will instead invest into Skyrim when the local shop gets it. I bet it'll be below 40 EUR... (there were some problems with availability so they don't have it yet, we'll get some extra discount because of that probably). I wanted MW3 but i don't want it that badly...


----------



## Volkszorn88 (Nov 12, 2011)

The number of sheep just keeps on rising.


----------



## LiveOrDie (Nov 12, 2011)




----------



## SK-1 (Nov 12, 2011)

MilkyWay said:


> I just cant see why people buy it year after year when it hardly changes.



Has anything changed? Is it the exact same graphics engine? Same texture mapping and everything? Has nothing improved? Just curious.


----------



## entropy13 (Nov 12, 2011)

SK-1 said:


> Has anything changed?



Yes. The story changed. 



SK-1 said:


> Is it the exact same graphics engine?



Yes. It even looks worse than MW2 and CoD 4 apparently. 



SK-1 said:


> Same texture mapping and everything?



Yes. There was even a whole building re-used. 



SK-1 said:


> Has nothing improved?



Yes. Nothing improved.


----------



## Drone (Nov 12, 2011)

wow, so disappointing and tragic ....


----------



## Frizz (Nov 12, 2011)

Buahah awesomely tragic and predictable, this is good news though, hopefully EA learns that competing with Steam is a no no. Half of my friends who are big BF fans didn't buy it because of Origin but in all seriousness I think Battlefield 3 sold the best it could without steam, it wasn't that the game had flaws here and there it was simply because of Origin. All in all CoD would have won sales even if Battlefield 3 was given out for half price that one is a no brainer as CoD just wins consoles.


----------



## fullhd99 (Nov 12, 2011)

*COD MW3:**The day-one sales for Call of Duty MW3 amounted to an estimated 6.5 million units sold in 24 hours and totaled $400 million in just two countries, the United States and the UK*

*BF3:**EA only provided us with the one-week sales numbers for Battlefield 3. Those numbers amounted to 5 million copies sold in a week, and that’s worldwide.*

*So, there you have it. BF3’s one-week worldwide sales were record-breaking for EA, but they weren’t even enough to match MW3’s day-one totals in two countries.*

*Call of Duty once again holds the top entertainment launch spot, as it has in 2009 (CoD MW2 )and 2010 (CoD Black Ops)*


----------



## Fx (Nov 12, 2011)

I understand the hate on consoles but apparently there is a lot of gaming snobs...


----------



## Shihab (Nov 12, 2011)

fullhd99 said:


> *COD MW3:**The day-one sales for Call of Duty MW3 amounted to an estimated 6.5 million units sold in 24 hours and totaled $400 million in just two countries, the United States and the UK*
> 
> *BF3:**EA only provided us with the one-week sales numbers for Battlefield 3. Those numbers amounted to 5 million copies sold in a week, and that’s worldwide.*
> 
> ...



Because it takes brains to play BF3, yet only reflexes (or patience for camping) can get you by in CoD. Most of those who buy CoD are kids (or adults for kids), who are mostly in it for the adrenaline rush (Or the sake to annoy us real adult gamers )

And please cut down a little bit on bold typing. It's giving me a headache.

Edit: I'm a CoD fan. Yet I too believe Activision should stop f*cking us all up, and make a decent game for once. Instead of recycling the same good ol' game.


----------



## NC37 (Nov 12, 2011)

EastCoasthandle said:


> What grabbed my attention was the lack of marketing needed to reach such estimated sales.  Most of that will in fact be just profit and, won't we subtracted from the amount of money used to market the game.



Everytime someone says the word CoD...millions of teenager pants get mysteriously wet.

It doesn't need to be great looking or anything new, just say CoD, and prepare extra tissues ;D


----------



## qubit (Nov 12, 2011)

NC37 said:


> Everytime someone says the word CoD...millions of teenager pants get mysteriously wet.
> 
> It doesn't need to be great looking or anything new, just say CoD, and prepare extra tissues ;D



 Nice.


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Nov 12, 2011)

fullhd99 said:


> COD MW3:The day-one sales for Call of Duty MW3 amounted to an estimated 6.5 million units sold in 24 hours and totaled $400 million in just two countries, the United States and the UK
> 
> BF3:EA only provided us with the one-week sales numbers for Battlefield 3. Those numbers amounted to 5 million copies sold in a week, and that’s worldwide.
> 
> ...



Next time just highlight your whole post and hit bold, you don't need to bold every sentence separately, seems you aren't too adept with the PC  I don't think anyone expect BF3 to outsell MW3, if they did they were insane. I didn't expect BF3 to be as close as it was, 5 million units is a shit load, I don't care if it was 1.5 mill less, it's still a ton, and closed a huge gap compared to BC2 sales. And I don't know about you, but I judge my games on gameplay, not on sales figures, though it is nice that BF3 brought gameplay and sales figures to the tables, sometimes it's hard to find servers with enough room for a few friends to join on me.



EastCoasthandle said:


> Lets be fair, BF3 needs to be fixed on many fronts.
> -C2D issues
> -game always crashing on 1st launch
> -randomly kicked from the server
> ...



It's not too hard to quash bugs when you been copy and pasting new maps on the same platform for almost half a decade. Most people I know play BF3 without any of those issues, they are out there, and yes links to as many threads as you want is fine, because people who are having issues will make threads, there is no point in making a thread if your game is running great.

I'd just rather have the dev's trying to push the boundaries and having some bugs slip through vs using a 5 year old engine and giving us nothing new.


----------



## digibucc (Nov 12, 2011)

whole post, awesome. +1 billion internetz kurgan


----------



## entropy13 (Nov 12, 2011)

More on the point of the "best-selling game ever".

I read that the "classic hits" the current generation knows from the 50s and 60s were almost always NOT the #1 songs at that time. 



> First of all, you have the fact that the crap from previous eras gets forgotten, leaving only the great stuff behind. Those songs on classic rock stations are obviously cherry-picked as the best and most indicative of an entire era; it's not a random sampling of all the music available at the time. Modern rock or pop stations, on the other hand, have to play whatever's come out in the past six months or so.  So there is a filter applied to the old stuff. Even most of the music in Mozart's day was bullshit. And because it was bullshit, nobody felt the need to keep copies. And what was preserved isn't played today. Because it's bullshit. So it's easy to look back at Mozart's era (or the 1960s, or whatever) and assume that because only the classics survive in our memory, everything made back then was a classic.  The other problem is we assume that what gets remembered over time is whatever was the most popular. Not true.
> 
> For instance, what survives from the Vietnam era (thanks mostly to Vietnam movies) are songs like the badass protest song "Fortunate Son" by Creedence Clearwater Revival and "Gimme Shelter" by the Rolling Stones. Both were released in 1969, after the war started going bad.
> 
> Now look at the Billboard year-end singles charts from 1946 to today. The top song in 1969? "Sugar, Sugar" by the Archies.



This is what is happening with Call of Duty. After World at War (which has a Broken Base - what's a "Broken Base"? Check tvtropes.org) it all went downhill in a "games to remember" sense.


----------



## Nick89 (Nov 12, 2011)

ಠ_ಠ

Bobby kotick has successfully found a way to make gamers eat their own shit over and over AND enjoy it.


----------



## Fx (Nov 12, 2011)

Shihabyooo said:


> Because it takes brains to play BF3, yet only reflexes (or patience for camping) can get you by in CoD. Most of those who buy CoD are kids (or adults for kids), who are mostly in it for the adrenaline rush (Or the sake to annoy us real adult gamers )
> 
> And please cut down a little bit on bold typing. It's giving me a headache.
> 
> Edit: I'm a CoD fan. Yet I too believe Activision should stop f*cking us all up, and make a decent game for once. Instead of recycling the same good ol' game.



really? it takes brains? so BF3 requires that I use my brain more so than CoD??

try again. BF3 isnt any harder to play than CoD. it is just a different game so it has a different style of gameplay. sure the gfx are recycled and shame on Activision for that, but that doesnt make it a bad game

also, just because lots of kiddies play it doesnt make it a bad game- it only means it is very popular. it has gained so much popularity due to its' solid gameplay and the simple fact that it runs well on consoles


----------



## entropy13 (Nov 12, 2011)

Fx said:


> it has gained so much popularity due to its' solid gameplay



Yes, it has "solid gameplay" but that doesn't really set it apart from other FPS with "solid gameplay", like the Battlefield series.



Fx said:


> and the simple fact that it runs well on consoles



Yeah, this is actually the primary cause of it's popularity.


----------



## Delta6326 (Nov 12, 2011)

I feel for the graphics. That's the only thing that stops me from MW3.


----------



## s{orpion (Nov 12, 2011)

*Call of Duty vs Battlefield*

yes, Call of Duty is a GREAT game!

i have played them all since first Call of Duty launch waaaaaay back!
(yes, i am THAT old lol)

However, it is sad to see them beating out Battlefield.

Battlefield offers larger maps, better graphics, distructable environments, 
realistic physx, 4x the unlockables, vehicles (land, sea, and air), 
better classes, better weapon variation, and FAR better squad/team play!

again, Call of Duty is good... but it is not even half the game of Battlefield.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Nov 12, 2011)

too high a total end cost for my likeing, ive passed activision a lot of money and they jus want more so im done with em, their Dlc structure sucks balls too, 4maps inc 2 stale ones for 12 quid isnt fair x4 prob 5 this time round


----------



## Frick (Nov 12, 2011)

Nick89 said:


> ಠ_ಠ
> 
> Bobby kotick has successfully found a way to make gamers eat their own shit over and over AND enjoy it.



CoD is anything but shit. Some day it might turn to that, but not yet.

You might not like it (I know I'm not a big fan) but the games are pretty solid (especially in MP) and that is pretty danged hard to ignore.


----------



## TheLaughingMan (Nov 12, 2011)

EastCoasthandle said:


> I believe that many of the elements from BF2 did in fact hurt the sales of BF3.  Such as:
> -no real squad leader that can give orders/way points
> -no commander
> -no in game voip
> ...



- There is a squad leader and he can give orders and everything. People online are stupid and just don't. Play with more TPU people.

- In game VOIP build into Battlelog site. Works just fine. As it is independent of servers, it doesn't affect their lag which makes it better than BF2.

- No sure what you need in game ping for, but ok. And there is no commander. got to give you those two.

- location of markers and the chat box do need to be adjusted and resized

- Blue tint? That is your monitor. Do you remember the sun? It is suppose to be bright. Its the SUN. Just like glare and dust should get in your eyes. While it is a game it is trying to be a realistic shooter.

- We didn't have to fight anyone. They did not work in a BETA. IT WAS A BETA. I can request ammo and stuff without the comma rose. I still find it to be too slow to use in active combat. And the squad system works fine. So what you can't name the squads. You can't do that in the real military either. And you can kick people out of your squad, though you can't send invites.

- We are getting mod tools later on. nothing stopping them from adding battle recorder later. Spectator mod will likely be added for the first tournaments.

- The chat messages are different colors based on everyone (white), Team (blue), and squad (green).

Did you play this game? It sounds like you are basing your "opinion" off of stuff you read online by bad reviewers.


----------



## Fx (Nov 12, 2011)

Delta6326 said:


> I feel for the graphics. That's the only thing that stops me from MW3.



not me. I remember back in the day when I first started playing FPS. I first started with Counterstrike and I would play that game every day. I played the hell out of that game for years and loved every minute of it. Valve eventually came out with CS:S and I moved on to that and played the hell out of it. I do this with every FPS I enjoy until I get bored of the game and start looking for a different feel. sometimes, that involves RTS, MMO, RPG or even another FPS

I agree that BF3 brings a lot to the table that CoD doesnt but it is fucking retarded for people to bash CoD just because it is so popular and/or they dont like it. again, shame on Activision for not spending more money to accomplish so much more possibilities in greatness. but, just because they are raking in on their cash cow doesnt take away from the fact that CoD has some really fun gameplay. when I say this I am referring to PC gameplay because I havent owned a console since 2003


----------



## Nick89 (Nov 12, 2011)

Frick said:


> CoD is anything but shit. Some day it might turn to that, but not yet.
> 
> You might not like it (I know I'm not a big fan) but the games are pretty solid (especially in MP) and that is pretty danged hard to ignore.



I'm not really saying its shit, but it is the exact game as before. they keep releasing the same game.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Nov 12, 2011)

1Kurgan1 said:


> It's not too hard to quash bugs when you been copy and pasting new maps on the same platform for almost half a decade. Most people I know play BF3 without any of those issues, they are out there, and yes links to as many threads as you want is fine, because people who are having issues will make threads, there is no point in making a thread if your game is running great.
> 
> I'd just rather have the dev's trying to push the boundaries and having some bugs slip through vs using a 5 year old engine and giving us nothing new.



You're not seeing the point being made in my post nor did you answer the question at the end of it.  Perception is reality.  That means how you are initially perceived will be how you are categorized.  It's not necessarily judging you.  It's what people do.  So to say, "oh well it can be fixed" is really missing the point.  MW3 launch was smoother then BF3's launch.   Albeit not perfect it was playable.  BF3 on the other had isn't playable and many have to revert to some odd tweaks to get it to work or just deal with it until it's patched.  Saying that BF3 runs fine for some is simply a farce.  There have been way to many thread/posts about the game stopping bugs to suggest that claim is simply not true.  

As for pushing the boundaries for some bugs...I'm sure you wouldn't want that in a vehicle you may purchase or the medicine you need.  Because in those examples safety, reliability and it's ability to actually work as intended are a priority.  It's just that many view games the same way.  I understand that you don't care as that's what your post implies.  However, there are others who do and they obviously are voting with their wallet to let you know.




TheLaughingMan said:


> - There is a squad leader and he can give orders and everything. People online are stupid and just don't. Play with more TPU people.
> 
> - In game VOIP build into Battlelog site. Works just fine. As it is independent of servers, it doesn't affect their lag which makes it better than BF2.
> 
> ...


Your post isn't reflective of what you are trying to imply.  Squad leader functionality is broken.  You can't effectively community with your squad via voip and you can't set way points to let people know what you want to do.  You can't invite or kick people from your squad.  Furthermore, the 1st one to create the squad should be squad leader.  Heck, you can't even join an empty squad as you are auto joined.  These are basic features.

As for voip itself this title needs it in game.  Something that console gamer currently enjoy using.  So that's also broken.  

Ok, I get it you don't care for in game ping but it's essential to let you know how well you are doing in game.  It's part of that information that will tell you if your lagging, if your hits will register as it should, etc.

The blue tint is from the game not the monitor LOL.  It's obvious you don't know much and it shows in your reply.  Here, have a look at their final color grading.  That is what Dice calls it .

It's the SUN, LOL really?  For a game it's not suppose to blind you while you are not directly looking at it.  Compound that with the amount of contrast it makes it hard to see.  You have a blinding sunlight and pitch black shadows and other dark places.  It needs to be fixed and I believe they are adjusting it in the patch.  And to further solidify the point Crysis did the same thing without blinding you vs BF3!  Or will you say that they somehow did it wrong, LOL.  Yeah, your point is moot.

Your beta point is whimsical at best.  Why? Because those points were fought before the beta.  You get it now, LOL.

There has been no announcement of a release date for mod tools/spectator mod, battle recorder, etc.  Have you been paying attention to current events?  Where have you been all this time?

The chat message box can only be fixed properly when the blue tint or final color grading is removed.  Have you been playing the game?  Have you research any of the wrong points you posted?  I take it you haven't.  Have a look at the difference between BC2's chat box vs BF3's chat box.





BC2





BF3

Do you see the blue tint now? LOL, and that's just a portion of the chat box.  BC2 color coding for chat is better then BF3 and should use what BF2/BC2 used. Not only the color coding but the organization of the chat box for BF2/BC2 is better then BF3.

While you post misleading information MW3 doesn't share any of the concerns people have for BF3.  Yes, it's a reused engine, yes, the graphics are similar and even the maps are similar but the game is playable and enjoyed by many.  If Dice had refined, fixed, tweaked and used FB 1.5 for BF3, provided more elements of BF2, fine tune the game after the beta, had the beta much earlier, fixed the bugs, removed the blue tint, reduced the contrast, etc.  Thus providing a much smoother bug free release without battlelog, origin, web browser plug ins, been available on Steam, etc I would assume it would have really competed against MW3.  But that didn't happen.

I really think that one of the main reasons why people like MW is because after the game is released there is no major overhauling to nerf weapons.  Sure they may have been some fine tuning here and there but what you initially bought will be the same game you play months after release.  I call that reliability.


----------



## 3volvedcombat (Nov 12, 2011)

entropy13 said:


> Yes, it has "solid gameplay" but that doesn't really set it apart from other FPS with "solid gameplay", like the Battlefield series.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, this is actually the primary cause of it's popularity.



It does not set it apart, from any other FPS series.

It sets it BESIDE other FPS genre's, like BF. 

Criticism in fine words is still criticism.



Everybody needs to realize how the COD boundaries have changed, period. The game is marketed slightly one way, but now there philosophy and strategy is different. 
COD is now in the realms, of NBA 2k, Fifa, and other sports games. 
There going to pop them out like babies, there not going to change much, and there going to be decently developed games. 
COD was fine tuned from mw1, and set for success as previous titles has made this ever more true. 
Now its around the last 2 years or so, before a new console jumps out to slap them, so there going to try to take advantage of this series as much as possible, by releasing yearly titles like NBA 2k ect ect.. are known for. 

Whats the deciding factor of COD franchise loosing this barrier, when the new consoles come out. Someone is going to have to engage in real development period. So we will either see an amazing increase and development in the COD series. 
Or they release a title, that will not compete with anything else and crash and burn. 

Right now they have the right to do yearly release, even if the prices are a little outrages. Its not really considering realism from the realms of any other FPS. Its more arcade and up to date. Consider it a NBA 2k series. Probably what there thinking right now.


----------



## entropy13 (Nov 12, 2011)

3volvedcombat said:


> It does not set it apart, from any other FPS series.
> 
> It sets it BESIDE other FPS genre's, like BF.
> 
> Criticism in fine words is still criticism.



"FPS" is a genre. How can a genre have a separate genre?


----------



## trickson (Nov 12, 2011)

Meh not into this game at all .


----------



## CyberDruid (Nov 12, 2011)

Satan is pleased


----------



## entropy13 (Nov 12, 2011)

Fx said:


> I agree that BF3 brings a lot to the table that CoD doesnt but it is fucking retarded for people to bash CoD just because it is so popular and/or they dont like it. again, shame on Activision for not spending more money to accomplish so much more possibilities in greatness. but, just because they are raking in on their cash cow doesnt take away from the fact that CoD has some really fun gameplay. when I say this I am referring to PC gameplay because I havent owned a console since 2003



I never really thought of CoD as a "fun" game. Maybe "easy to learn" or "short learning curve" but definitely not "fun." Counter-Strike is still that "fun" game. I still remember playing for 2 hours in a LAN shop against various people, it was CS 1.3 I think. It was usually 36v36 but sometimes it reaches 42v42 (meaning all the PCs were playing in that map). I vividly remember my score then, 146 kills and 39 deaths.


----------



## morphy (Nov 12, 2011)

I got nothing against MW3 as a game. But imo I don't think I should pay full price for what  is essentially a DLC. It's a mappack with skins and new perks. If the game was $30 I'd probably buy it.


----------



## Fx (Nov 12, 2011)

entropy13 said:


> I never really thought of CoD as a "fun" game. Maybe "easy to learn" or "short learning curve" but definitely not "fun." Counter-Strike is still that "fun" game. I still remember playing for 2 hours in a LAN shop against various people, it was CS 1.3 I think. It was usually 36v36 but sometimes it reaches 42v42 (meaning all the PCs were playing in that map). I vividly remember my score then, 146 kills and 39 deaths.



I enjoy the MW series for nothing other than the smooth reflex-based gameplay. CS maps were based around the same thing and used simple objectives to make the matches more dynamic. MW has improved upon that. I have gone back to CS 1.3 about a year ago and just couldnt get into it after experiencing a much more refined experience but CS has a special place in my fond early-gaming days...



morphy said:


> I got nothing against MW3 as a game. But imo I don't think I should pay full price for what  is essentially a DLC. It's a mappack with skins and new perks. If the game was $30 I'd probably buy it.



I definitely see your point of you. my approach with every one of the MW games has been to buy the vanilla release and play it till I get bored. I never buy any of the DLCs because I can get into plenty of action without them


----------



## araditus (Nov 12, 2011)

Dead serious, Counter-Strike is still the best, most balanced, pure FPS in history. Save money get gun, no air strikes, its your eyeballs, your reaction time, your tactical decisions, vs someone elses.

Admitingly its not an arcade game like the Call of Duty franchise,and Battlefield would be such a better game without EA micromanaging its customers (origin) passed on it for that sole reason.


----------



## TheLaughingMan (Nov 12, 2011)

EastCoasthandle said:


> Your post isn't reflective of what you are trying to imply.  Squad leader functionality is broken.  You can't effectively community with your squad via voip and you can't set way points to let people know what you want to do.  You can't invite or kick people from your squad.  Furthermore, the 1st one to create the squad should be squad leader.  Heck, you can't even join an empty squad as you are auto joined.  These are basic features.
> 
> As for voip itself this title needs it in game.  Something that console gamer currently enjoy using.  So that's also broken.
> 
> ...



Seriously, I have nothing against MW3. If that is what people want to play, fine. Its not my flavor of game. You are projecting really really hard as i didn't even mention MW3 in my post, so i am not sure why you feel the need to attack me about it. You let your fanboy show there. I was going to PM this so we could privately discuss this, but F^*& that noise.

And You can't have played BF3. Once again, you can give orders. The first person in a squad is squad leader. You can move to an empty squad now. You can kick people from a squad. I know all this because I have done it. You are talking about stuff you don't know about. In game VOIP I have not tried to use so i don't know and way points are gone (I never really used them). So everything you just said there for the second time is based on the BETA and NOT the final release.

I didn't say I didn't care for in game ping. I said I don't need it. I saw my ping before i joined the server. I don't need to be kept up to date about it, but thats me. BF3 is a server based system and your ping will not change much during play. They have even tweaked this further to remove the auto ping adjustment BS from BC2. You do need in game ping for a direct connect system like Modern Warfare as the person you connected will have a far less stable connection than a dedicated server. Ping in game good for MW3, not important for BF3 what so ever.

And while you want to claim I don't know much, you don't know how to calibrate your monitor. That blue tint you are talking about does not exist in my game cause I corrected any odd colors. Whoever took those pictures is techincally savvy, but a bit of a tosser.

And as for misleading. MW1 and MW2 did get several rebalances for weapons and bug fixes. The difference is, you had to pay for the required update in MW2 and it still never fixed several major bugs and exploits. I don't hold this against either title because stuff happens. Every single game needs maintenance. It is the longest part of the software cycle for a reason.

As for the sun not blinding you because its a game??? Really, that is your defense? Once again, for the second time, BF3 was going for a realistic environment. The Sun can blind soldiers in real life, they have the tech now to do it in game, so they did it. Its not a plus or a minus, its just a fact. I personal think including those kinds of touches is what makes BF3 the game it is right now. The one you know nothing about apparently.

I recommend you stick to what you know in this matter, put the fanboy away, and have a simple forum discussion about MW3 breaking this record.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Nov 12, 2011)

TheLaughingMan said:


> Seriously, I have nothing against MW3. If that is what people want to play, fine. Its not my flavor of game. You are projecting really really hard as i didn't even mention MW3 in my post, so i am not sure why you feel the need to attack me about it. You let your fanboy show there. I was going to PM this so we could privately discuss this, but F^*& that noise.
> 
> And You can't have played BF3. Once again, you can give orders. The first person in a squad is squad leader. You can move to an empty squad now. You can kick people from a squad. I know all this because I have done it. You are talking about stuff you don't know about. In game VOIP I have not tried to use so i don't know and way points are gone (I never really used them). So everything you just said there for the second time is based on the BETA and NOT the final release.
> 
> ...


This thread is about MW3 not BF3 which indicates that you are the fanboy.  I'm just keeping the discussion on topic here.  Yes, MW has had tweaks and I've said as much but the gameplay is essentially the same.  All the points I've made to you were to get you to see why MW3 has done well .  Not to cater to a MW3 vs BF3.  

And you have to admit a lot of your points were rebuffed by the examples I've provided.  The blue tint is there.  The blinding sunlight is a problem when compared to crysis.  The squad leader doesn't do much to promote team play, etc all point to what people don't like about the game and could possibly explain why they prefer MW3 even though it's dated (some believe it to be a rehash of MW2).  

MW3 isn't about team play, it never was.  It's pure run and gun/lone wolfing and that's what people like.  BF3 on the other hand should be all about team play and some of the team play elements left out the game needs to be added back.  You think those elements are fine but I tell you that people don't agree with you.  

So it's clear we won't agree but what can't be argued are the results.  MW3 sold over twice as much as BF3 and there is no denying that.  Although the reason will vary it's clear that a bug free, fun game that caters to what people like goes a long way in making a game popular and profitable.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Nov 12, 2011)

Off Topic , but i just have to say, on BF3 how do you get blinding sunlight in a tunnel, The main problem in BF3 for me is the light from gun torches or whatever it is, it is really stupid, if someone is pointing it towards you, you cannot see feck all, it needs fixing.

On topic, well done to activision, i may well end up buying this too.

Anyone see this?

UK Campaigners Trying To Get Modern Warfare 3 Banned

http://www.itproportal.com/2011/05/25/uk-campaigners-trying-to-get-modern-warfare-3-banned/


----------



## the54thvoid (Nov 12, 2011)

Wow, so much hate.

It's a fucking game.  Same way an i-phone is a great phone but not necessarily everyone's cup of tea (i have an HTC desire and it's lovely) MW3 is a great game but not everyone's cup of tea.

Seriously do we all have to fight over it?

Well done for making a popular franchise.


----------



## qubit (Nov 12, 2011)

the54thvoid said:


> *Wow, so much hate.*
> 
> It's a fucking game.  Same way an i-phone is a great phone but not necessarily everyone's cup of tea (i have an HTC desire and it's lovely) MW3 is a great game but not everyone's cup of tea.
> 
> ...



Absolutely. And this thread is only about a press release at that! lol

It's only a game. Now, the iPhone on the other hand...


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Nov 12, 2011)

I'll buy and play both, i don't care for other peoples dislikes.

Don't get me started on the iphone though.


----------



## mediasorcerer (Nov 13, 2011)

Im just going to play=whatever comes my way, and enjoy it all as best i can.both mw3 and bf3 are good games.Lucky we are spoilt for choice these days hey?


----------



## TheGuruStud (Nov 13, 2011)

I don't want to live on this planet anymore. Tim Tebow, Justin Bieber and CoD.

There is no hope.

I hope the new CS squashes this pos game like a bug, but with so many lamers that call themselves gamers, I doubt it (not that CSS was all that good).


----------



## TheLaughingMan (Nov 13, 2011)

EastCoasthandle said:


> This thread is about MW3 not BF3 which indicates that you are the fanboy.  I'm just keeping the discussion on topic here.  Yes, MW has had tweaks and I've said as much but the gameplay is essentially the same.  All the points I've made to you were to get you to see why MW3 has done well .  Not to cater to a MW3 vs BF3.
> 
> And you have to admit a lot of your points were rebuffed by the examples I've provided.  The blue tint is there.  The blinding sunlight is a problem when compared to crysis.  The squad leader doesn't do much to promote team play, etc all point to what people don't like about the game and could possibly explain why they prefer MW3 even though it's dated (some believe it to be a rehash of MW2).
> 
> ...



Nope you are just trolling and I am done playing with children.

Good job MW3 for attracting these kind of people. This is why I don't play you.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Nov 13, 2011)

TheLaughingMan said:


> Nope you are just trolling and I am done playing with children.
> 
> Good job MW3 for attracting these kind of people. This is why I don't play you.



Name calling does not make a point on the subject .  In any case, it's clear that there is room for more then one type of FPS gaming play style.


----------



## PaNiC (Nov 13, 2011)

Wii was out selling ps3 and xbox dose that mean it's was better? NO.
MW3 = Dressed up casual trash.
BF3 = Playable benchmark for graphics nerds to have a boner and play at the same time.
So many years have gone past and still no modern day FPS is as good as Count Strike was.


----------



## 3volvedcombat (Nov 13, 2011)

PaNiC said:


> Wii was out selling ps3 and xbox dose that mean it's was better? NO.
> MW3 = Dressed up casual trash.
> BF3 = Playable benchmark for graphics nerds to have a boner and play at the same time.
> So many years have gone past and still no modern day FPS is as good as Count Strike was.



Speaking beyond the truth.

Nothing was as good as blasting that desert eagle and watching flimsy body's shoot across the halls. 

But Fuck counter-strike flash bangs, fuckin 20 of them @ once 24/7


----------



## pr0n Inspector (Nov 13, 2011)

PaNiC said:


> Wii was out selling ps3 and xbox dose that mean it's was better? NO.
> MW3 = Dressed up casual trash.
> BF3 = Playable benchmark for graphics nerds to have a boner and play at the same time.
> So many years have gone past and still no modern day FPS is as good as Count Strike was.



Define "better".

Who gets to set the standard of "good"? Faceless Internet personas? Get over your self-importance, the world is bigger than TPU, hardcore gaming communities and basements.


----------



## entropy13 (Nov 13, 2011)

pr0n Inspector said:


> Define "better".
> 
> Who gets to set the standard of "good"? Faceless Internet personas? Get over your self-importance, the world is bigger than TPU, hardcore gaming communities and basements.



Hmm...you protest someone's attempt to put a standard of "good", but in your prior statement, also asks someone to define (or "set a standard") on what is "better".


----------



## LiveOrDie (Nov 13, 2011)

My thoughts

COD MW3 
Graphics = Very out dated worse looking that blackops no jump to DX10 or 11 
Physx = None bullets though walls ?? 
Movement =  Unrealistic/Fast like you weigh nothing but that's Arcade style movement which i dont mind but i find MW3 feels like it railed compared to blackops. 
Team Work = Not needed in any game mode

BF3
Graphics = Great on par with today's standards
Physx = Great holds the lead with destructible worlds
Movement =  Realistic and slow like your carrying the weight of a real soldier
Team Work = Dependent in most game modes


----------



## pr0n Inspector (Nov 13, 2011)

entropy13 said:


> Hmm...you protest someone's attempt to put a standard of "good", but in your prior statement, also asks someone to define (or "set a standard") on what is "better".



His own definition of "better" is not universal, that's exactly the point.
Also, good and better are not the same thing. A being better than B doesn't instantly mean it's "good".

Now go back to hugging your loli dakimakura, smartass.


----------



## Fx (Nov 13, 2011)

Live OR Die said:


> My thoughts
> 
> COD MW3
> Graphics = Very out dated worse looking that blackops no jump to DX10 or 11
> ...



definitely your thoughts

I can throw team work and movement out the window. I completely agree with you on the physx and partially agree with you about the graphics. the graphics arent *very* out dated but they could definitely be improved


----------



## LiveOrDie (Nov 13, 2011)

Fx said:


> definitely your thoughts
> 
> I can throw team work and movement out the window. I completely agree with you on the physx and partially agree with you about the graphics. the graphics arent *very* out dated but they could definitely be improved



For today's standards in graphics there out dated they were fine around 2009 when MW2 come out but should be DX10 by now.


ENGINES
    Call of Duty 2 (2005) IW 2.0
    Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare (2007) IW 3.0
    Call of Duty: World at War (2008) IW 3.0 (Modified)
    Quantum of Solace (2008) IW 3.0 (Heavily Modified)
    Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 (2009) IW 4.0
    Call of Duty: Black Ops (2010) IW 3.0 (Modified) <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<EDIT BEST SO FAR!!!!
    GoldenEye 007 (2010) IW 3.0
    Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 (2011) MW3 engine

Whats this MW3 Engine  more like IW 4.0 renamed to save time.


----------



## Super XP (Nov 13, 2011)

EastCoasthandle said:


> Excellent point! Preventing BF3 from Steam certainly didn't help their cause to compete with MW3.  I wonder if we will see it on Steam now?


Which is why I didn't buy it.


----------



## TRIPTEX_CAN (Nov 13, 2011)

Doesnt matter how many copies this game sold to consoles tards. MW3 sucks. 

Qubit had a contest to receive an free copy of this game and hardly anyone cared. You could have given away a ANYTHING and still had a stronger response from the TPU community.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Nov 13, 2011)

Live OR Die said:


> For today's standards in graphics there out dated they were fine around 2009 when MW2 come out but should be DX10 by now.
> 
> 
> ENGINES
> ...



you do realize that the IW3.0/4.0 engines are renamed Idtech3/Quake3 engines right?? If not says it directly on the back of your games box. "Id Technology Id software, INC"


----------



## [H]@RD5TUFF (Nov 14, 2011)

It's a decent game.


----------



## qubit (Nov 14, 2011)

TRIPTEX_CAN said:


> Doesnt matter how many copies this game sold to consoles tards. MW3 sucks.
> 
> Qubit had a contest to receive an free copy of this game and hardly anyone cared. You could have given away a ANYTHING and still had a stronger response from the TPU community.



Well, I wouldn't say no one cared, but the response was a bit lukewarm, which is odd, considering how well it sold.


----------



## brandonwh64 (Nov 14, 2011)

The game leaves alot of people feeling used. If IW/Activision would put more effort into what they do for the COD series then you would not have recycled engine, layout, and story line.


----------



## digibucc (Nov 14, 2011)

qubit said:


> the response was a bit lukewarm, which is odd, considering how well it sold.



how is that odd? it needs to be bought and experienced in order to have a response to it. it sold because so many people wrongly assumed it would be improved, now you see half the kids who waited hours in line talking about how bad it is, and that takes something special to accomplish imo. those kids are likely to love it no matter what, so they had to screw something up bad to disappoint.


----------

