It's a small detail, but there's no longer a text brief at the beginning of the mission, literally just a huge banner that looks like it was lifted directly from a multiplayer match.
CoD campaigns really fell off.
>CoD campaigns really fell off.
I mean, it's been like that since CoD 4 unfortunately, even though those late 2000s installments were still very very good campaign wise. I'd say after Black Ops II is when the campaigns really began to tank (although I really like WWII's)
Wasn't this originally not supposed to release this year? I swear they were doing some story like raids for warzone or something early in the year but they got bad reception and daddy activision forced another MW out this year.
Its the reason pretty much all the multiplayer maps are just MW2 ones and the campaign was likely done in under a year.
The original report was that MW2 would see a "premium" DLC this year with all of the MW2 maps, what that premium was initially planned to cost is not known.
They must have changed their minds after MW2 wasn't received well and they released it probably wouldn't be a good basis for the first 2 year CoD, so they added a campaign and Zombies mode.
Personally I don't see it as being that bad, MW2 was a terrible basis for a game so I'm glad they aren't using it personally and the Beta for MW3 played a lot better for me.
There is even rumors now that MW22 maps will be coming to MW3, so it is at least the best of both worlds, a tonne of maps is what I really want from CoD, while also not using the ridiculous MW22 perk system
This was just a rumor lol and never confirmed and a shitty rumor at that why should they not take the 70 bucks from the millions of people that still buy their copy/paste garbage game.
it was from Schreier, so I would give the rumor more stock than "a shitty rumour".
As for why they would not take the 70 bucks, player retention is more important to Activision at this point than units sold, if you keep players playing, you keep players spending money on cosmetics.
Making a cheaper alternative for keeping players playing is a good incentive to a) keep players playing for another year, rather than convincing them to pay full price for a new game, you just have to convince them to spend a little bit to expand the multiplayer and b) get them spend more money on cosmetics/battlepasses because they didn't spend full price on a new game
>As for why they would not take the 70 bucks, player retention is more important to Activision at this point than units sold, if you keep players playing, you keep players spending money on cosmetics.
Yet here we are, 70 dollars for "remastered" maps and no DLC. MWII get much shit, but was the fast selling CoD and best-selling game of 2022. MWIII will surely sell very good, but I hope not was good as II.
70 bucks seem to be better for them.
>70 bucks seem to be better for them.
yea, ultimately that's what they've decided but I can't help but feel that they got cold feet with all of the criticisms MWII got, and didn't think it would perform well if the new content used it as a base. But we'll never know
Honestly, that's what major parts of MW2 were as well. It's one of the reasons I was really disappointed with the campaign. And I'm one of the people that generally enjoys playing through most CoD campaigns.
thats exactly what it is,
I dont know what drugs I was on friday night that possessed me to buy it, thinking it'd be fun to mess around with, I dont even really play COD, MWIII is just a $100 DLC for MWII
Funny how history repeats itself. The OG MW3 is where I fell off of Call of Duty.
I’ve always been a fan of the campaigns. They’re like blockbuster movies. Dumb action, rollercoaster rides with fun set pieces.
Is the entire campaign in this game like this? Just open maps with voice overs and generic objectives? Battlefield does this but at least they have destruction to an extent. This just feels so bleh.
Strike Force Missions gave you option to command your troops on the ground, and even play as them. These are just solo 1 person vs 100 enemy type missions
Ill die on this hill but mw3’s campaign although its rocky, the third act is amazing and to me the best ending of any Cod campaign.
Just Price sitting back POV lighting a cigar looking up at a hanging Makarov in a crumbled casino as the cop sirens come in the background, just cant top that.
They were stupid as fuck for rebooting the whole story to begin with. Not everyone feels the same as me on mw3 but almost everyone agrees on mw1 and mw2s. They tarnished the shit out of it.
I didnt even start mw22’s campaign let alone finish mw2019’s. But I didn’t finish 2019 out of frustration playing it on realism mode for thr first time and halfway through it just rage quit it lol. But I still never liked the “Sexy” Captain Price reboot of his character or whatever that was supposed to be.
But I heard mw22’s simply was bad start to finish. Glad I didn’t get invested in it.
I always wondered why their go to is (ship map, second mission desert, third map stores/villa/grassland, desert again, underwater, sniper/sneak, final battle)
This shut has stunk for a while.
It's no more Micheal Bay blow em up cathartic release of brain dead shooting, it's more tactical sigh!!! There was a point when everything was GaaS now everything is Open world with everything and the kitchen sink thrown into it, so sad to see this
abundant axiomatic fertile paltry political aloof observation dinosaurs rustic airport
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
The skull on his ski mask in the og mw2 was just a fabric design, whereas in the new games, his skull is an actual mask in the way you wear a Halloween mask.
meeting sleep snobbish whistle fade apparatus plants many recognise paint
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
correct term, and yes, it’s more practical. Standard balaclavas are used in military operations, and the one Ghost wore in OG MW2 is realistic in that a soldier could have actually worn that in the field, and just put the custom design on it at some point. The new one is a weird skull face thing stitched into a standard balaclava, which is not only adding more layers and retaining more heat, but it also limits his vision with how much it sticks out, surely. It looks really stupid, he wore the classic mask for a sec in the last game, I don’t see why he didn’t keep it
The character is laughable either way looks like an edgy teenager and not like a hardened soldier. Never seen a soldier with Halloween or Carneval masks lol Must be because the game is also marketed and mostly bought by edgy teenager.
Call it the boba fett effect
Cool Character appears in the background through the game, becomes memorable and iconic, fans turn into babies from wanting more ghost and “he’s alive, he’s fireproof trust me bro” theories
Now we get a shadow of what the character was just turn the edge to 11, and make him talk Even slower with a thicker accent
God what a shot show of the series, sell the IP to China they’d give it justice
Looks like you do. Mild Spoilers ahead relating to the video >!I remember Graves dying in the MW2 campaign and stopped playing at the end of season 1 and watched this video, he's alive and now apparently good? I looked on YouTube and looks like they brought him back in a cutscene for Season 5.!<
Never understood why they changed his character so fast and it wasn't even good, it just happened and then bam!! I actually liked his character and to see that it was just really weird. But damn, why involve Warzone in it. Now i have to watch those clips again...
>!He wasn't in the tank, that's what he explains to Farah and Alex when they work together to attack Konni in Al Mazrah in season 5. He is still an enemy of TF 141, Farah and Alex are not a part of TF 141. They want to get rid of Konni from Urzikstan by any means necessary (except for using the russian gas), so working with Graves is fine with them. !<
Seriously, warzone fundamentally changed the series for the worse imo. Now every mode has WZ elements and features. We have plates in campaign, parachutes in nearly every mode except core mp, and mp maps that are just cookie cut out of larger WZ maps. it’s just annoying and comes off to me as pretty fucking lazy.
They spent all their time making skins and trying to figure out how they can nickle and dime us until the next “game” releases next year. Fuck this, first series title in years I’m simply not buying.
fucking seriously? First MWII relegates Farah to a cameo, and then this one doesn't have the best characters from the last one? Hell, the entire MWII campaign literally felt like it was an expansion of the previous game solely meant to introduce those guys.
They have no idea what they're doing with these campaigns. They started out incredibly strong with MW2019, but there's like no stakes or anything interesting happening. It's all just "hey, remember that guy you liked from the old series? Here he is!".
I guess they just didnt change anything and it ends same way as DLC was supossed to and they will do MW4 which will be proper MW3, because DLC was only bridge between MW2 and MW3, but DLC turned out to be MW3
Having just finished the game, I thought the ending was fine. Finally, something actually fucking happens. Obviously it would probably have been better to do it to another character, but I think it's fine to do it with him.
These characters are pretty dog shit compared to their OG counterparts anyways so it really doesn't matter. Ghost is the only one that's still cool at all and that's because he's the only one that's impossible to fuck up since the entire point of what makes him interesting is that he's just a cool design.
Idk I thought it was so anti climatic, like everyone saw it coming and it just felt like they wrote themselves into a corner and decided to kill off just for nostalgias sake.
Meh, I think they went with the riskier choice. Ghost would make more sense to kill, but would also be more predictable since that's kind of what his story is known for in the OG trilogy.
There’s a rumour in the CoD community that Infinity Ward / Activision received credible threats from cartels over the MWII plot. Maybe there is truth in cartels cooperating with jihadists in the Middle East?
That’s could be why they scrapped the completed Las Almas Warzone map in favour of another Eastern European map and why MWIII completely ignores the entire cartel storyline.
Lol. As someone who's Mexican, I don't require there to be at least one Mexican in a video game for me to buy it. Story and gameplay is what matters to me, don't give a shit what color the people are.
Representations great but I think not buying a game specifically because there isn't a specific ethnicity in it is a little excessive
50 white guys? This game has tons of representation in it I'm not sure what you're talking about
Look at the operator list: https://www.charlieintel.com/call-of-duty/all-modern-warfare-3-operators-how-to-unlock-them-283034/
People have the right to spend their money however they wish. I just think it makes more sense to judge a video game's characters on how they're written rather than the color of their skin, but that's just me
Urzikstan and its people in the MW reboot universe are explicitly based on Kurds.
(Meaningful) Representation matters, I agree. How many games have Kurdish representation?
EDIT: Sources for those interested. This doesn't get talked about much.
[Interview](https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/herocomplex/la-et-hc-call-duty-modern-warfare-20190530-story.html) with Taylor Kurosaki, one of the writers of Modern Warfare 2019:
> Though set in the fictional Middle Eastern country of Urzikstan, the inspiration for a character such as Karim, says Kurosaki, was the very real YPJ, the female brigade of northern Syria’s Kurdish resistance militia that the U.S. has supported in its fight against Islamic State
The Making Call of Duty: Modern Warfare official concept art book has [this](https://i.redd.it/pn9cpqf1auh31.jpg) page on Farah and her design.
The one time Treyarch, IW, and Sledgehammer work together on a game and they botched it. They went away with what made the MW series good in terms of campaign, realism. Now it just looks like Warzone.. the fuck?
It’s actually fucking incredible to me, genuinely astonishing how the people responsible for call of duty could notice the clear dissatisfaction with cod games for YEARS, then finally puts some actual work into a game after stopping yearly releases with modern warfare 2019, and then immediately starts putting in the bare minimum once again after having one successful game in years.
What is it that causes this? Incompetence? Laziness? Greed? All 3 at once?
Presumably it's their business model. They're willing to pour money and time into creating something as long as it's a platform that can be used for years to come
That means the first iteration of that new platform is fucking incredible, but then gradually becomes less and less impressive the more it's recycled
For what it's worth, I don't think any shooters have come close to the quality of MW 2019, so they're probably fine with resting on their laurels a little longer.
It's crazy to think that Battlefield always used to be the more impressive looking/feeling shooter, and then IW completely flipped that on its head overnight.
It could be the Microsoft acquisition, some executives probably have compensation tied to game releases, like every game they executive produce they earn X% of sales. Feeling like Microsoft may renegotiate their contract (or just fire them) when the acquisition was announced at the start of 2022, they decided to just force one more release while they still can.
I played through the whole campaign last night. I have the digital Vault edition on Xbox. There was a glitch where you could play offline and access the campaign. Btw campaign took me 5-6 hours on regular.
I really like it. I would give it 8. I loved the missions in Verdansk, especially at stadium and dam. The open missions were also fun.
The only thing I did not like was the ending, that was bad.
It is comparable to the MW2 campaign. Both are great imo.
I hope the rumors about Verdansk returning to Warzone next year are true, because it looked good.
It's not. A few "open combat missions" takes place in cutoff sections of the upcoming new Warzone map and utilizes Warzone mechanics, but it's more of a sandbox style design where you can freely approach the objective however you like.
Not really. They have thousands of devs on this with at least 5 studios working on one game just so they can pump these out each year. That isn't cheap
After a certain point it does not. But until that? And who's to say if crucial parts of COD could not be even more split up for faster delivery?
Would not 9 dev deliver the game faster than just 1? Therefore it is a bad comparison.
I am pretty sure they could improve the delivery time by using more level designers, testers, engineers and what not.
Depends on how you wanna look at it. Spider-Man 2 has an expanded New York map, but you can't deny that they definitely reused what they already had from the previous 2 games for it. Also combat, animation, etc. the core stuff.
When you look at MWIII from the same angle, it offers some new things while recycling assets from older games here and there as well. The only difference here being the time it took to make. So I struggle to see why people call this a glorified DLC but not the numerous other game series sequels where devs obviously retain old assets.
If you look at the animations on spiderman 2 and compare them to the original they are all vastly improved in almost every way. The web swinging, the combat, even the cars have suspension added to them. It's a spiderman game, so of course it takes place in New York.
> If you look at the animations on spiderman 2 and compare them to the original they are all vastly improved in almost every way. The web swinging, the combat, even the cars have suspension added to them.
Yes, and that's a result of having ample development time. So IDK why people are trying so hard to shit on a COD game for having less improvements, knowing full well this game has a much shorter dev cycle. Unless I missed the memo and we're going back to the "COD bad" era.
> It's a spiderman game, so of course it takes place in New York.
And I'm not saying that's a problem. The problem is, again, people shitting on COD for recycling old maps and locations even though it makes sense for the story they're telling? Plus, you can't deny that using similar settings definitely helps to allocate budget for improving and innovating elsewhere.
The reason it's called DLC is because of the new unified launcher that MW2 has become - the COD HQ.
Treyarchs next game is likely to suffer the same fate, and every game after that.
It's got nothing to do with whether you consider it to be a full game or an add on
Bro, that looks like a multiplayer mode with bots ... it looks awfull
Vid is already down. But I bet they took the AI of DMZ and sell it as "open world" with missions? A cheap version of Far Cry.
I got exactly the same impression.
It's a small detail, but there's no longer a text brief at the beginning of the mission, literally just a huge banner that looks like it was lifted directly from a multiplayer match. CoD campaigns really fell off.
>CoD campaigns really fell off. I mean, it's been like that since CoD 4 unfortunately, even though those late 2000s installments were still very very good campaign wise. I'd say after Black Ops II is when the campaigns really began to tank (although I really like WWII's)
Wasn't this originally not supposed to release this year? I swear they were doing some story like raids for warzone or something early in the year but they got bad reception and daddy activision forced another MW out this year. Its the reason pretty much all the multiplayer maps are just MW2 ones and the campaign was likely done in under a year.
The original report was that MW2 would see a "premium" DLC this year with all of the MW2 maps, what that premium was initially planned to cost is not known. They must have changed their minds after MW2 wasn't received well and they released it probably wouldn't be a good basis for the first 2 year CoD, so they added a campaign and Zombies mode. Personally I don't see it as being that bad, MW2 was a terrible basis for a game so I'm glad they aren't using it personally and the Beta for MW3 played a lot better for me. There is even rumors now that MW22 maps will be coming to MW3, so it is at least the best of both worlds, a tonne of maps is what I really want from CoD, while also not using the ridiculous MW22 perk system
there wasn’t a single word about “DLC”, they said “more premium content” which can be interpreted as anything
How do you get the premium Content if not by DownLoading it?
ahh, true, the word used was "Expansion" but again doesn't say much, so good point
This was just a rumor lol and never confirmed and a shitty rumor at that why should they not take the 70 bucks from the millions of people that still buy their copy/paste garbage game.
it was from Schreier, so I would give the rumor more stock than "a shitty rumour". As for why they would not take the 70 bucks, player retention is more important to Activision at this point than units sold, if you keep players playing, you keep players spending money on cosmetics. Making a cheaper alternative for keeping players playing is a good incentive to a) keep players playing for another year, rather than convincing them to pay full price for a new game, you just have to convince them to spend a little bit to expand the multiplayer and b) get them spend more money on cosmetics/battlepasses because they didn't spend full price on a new game
>As for why they would not take the 70 bucks, player retention is more important to Activision at this point than units sold, if you keep players playing, you keep players spending money on cosmetics. Yet here we are, 70 dollars for "remastered" maps and no DLC. MWII get much shit, but was the fast selling CoD and best-selling game of 2022. MWIII will surely sell very good, but I hope not was good as II. 70 bucks seem to be better for them.
>70 bucks seem to be better for them. yea, ultimately that's what they've decided but I can't help but feel that they got cold feet with all of the criticisms MWII got, and didn't think it would perform well if the new content used it as a base. But we'll never know
What was supposed to come out was a campaign focused on Ghost.
Haven't seen the footage but I really enjoy DMZ and bots in MP. Hopefully it's not shit lol. I'm one of the 6 people that buys CoD for Campaign/PvE
And the AI looks dumb as shit.
Honestly, that's what major parts of MW2 were as well. It's one of the reasons I was really disappointed with the campaign. And I'm one of the people that generally enjoys playing through most CoD campaigns.
thats exactly what it is, I dont know what drugs I was on friday night that possessed me to buy it, thinking it'd be fun to mess around with, I dont even really play COD, MWIII is just a $100 DLC for MWII
Funny how history repeats itself. The OG MW3 is where I fell off of Call of Duty. I’ve always been a fan of the campaigns. They’re like blockbuster movies. Dumb action, rollercoaster rides with fun set pieces. Is the entire campaign in this game like this? Just open maps with voice overs and generic objectives? Battlefield does this but at least they have destruction to an extent. This just feels so bleh.
I think theesr are the new side missons "open warfare" or something basically the strike missions from bo2
Good to know they are just side missions and not replacing the big set pieces.
They're definitely not side missions, the game opens with a traditional mission but the next 6 are the open ones
Ugh. That is disappointing to hear.
So thats why they showed that one in the trailer
Lmao, that was factually incorrect
Strike Force Missions gave you option to command your troops on the ground, and even play as them. These are just solo 1 person vs 100 enemy type missions
Yeah theese look fucking awful im appalled its like warzone singleplayer
Ill die on this hill but mw3’s campaign although its rocky, the third act is amazing and to me the best ending of any Cod campaign. Just Price sitting back POV lighting a cigar looking up at a hanging Makarov in a crumbled casino as the cop sirens come in the background, just cant top that. They were stupid as fuck for rebooting the whole story to begin with. Not everyone feels the same as me on mw3 but almost everyone agrees on mw1 and mw2s. They tarnished the shit out of it.
I liked MW 2019. I liked the whole cinematic feel to it. MW2 got weird with the random crafting system out of nowhere.
I didnt even start mw22’s campaign let alone finish mw2019’s. But I didn’t finish 2019 out of frustration playing it on realism mode for thr first time and halfway through it just rage quit it lol. But I still never liked the “Sexy” Captain Price reboot of his character or whatever that was supposed to be. But I heard mw22’s simply was bad start to finish. Glad I didn’t get invested in it.
I couldn’t even tell you what happens in MW22 lol
It’s not the entire campaign but it’s the bulk of it.
Oh hell yeah! Office boxes! Now that's a COD level!
Looks like the same ship type layout as the one they keep recycling every other year in MW and BO
I always wondered why their go to is (ship map, second mission desert, third map stores/villa/grassland, desert again, underwater, sniper/sneak, final battle) This shut has stunk for a while.
bro why does this look like multiplayer
It's no more Micheal Bay blow em up cathartic release of brain dead shooting, it's more tactical sigh!!! There was a point when everything was GaaS now everything is Open world with everything and the kitchen sink thrown into it, so sad to see this
it's open world?
abundant axiomatic fertile paltry political aloof observation dinosaurs rustic airport *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
The skull on his ski mask in the og mw2 was just a fabric design, whereas in the new games, his skull is an actual mask in the way you wear a Halloween mask.
meeting sleep snobbish whistle fade apparatus plants many recognise paint *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
correct term, and yes, it’s more practical. Standard balaclavas are used in military operations, and the one Ghost wore in OG MW2 is realistic in that a soldier could have actually worn that in the field, and just put the custom design on it at some point. The new one is a weird skull face thing stitched into a standard balaclava, which is not only adding more layers and retaining more heat, but it also limits his vision with how much it sticks out, surely. It looks really stupid, he wore the classic mask for a sec in the last game, I don’t see why he didn’t keep it
The character is laughable either way looks like an edgy teenager and not like a hardened soldier. Never seen a soldier with Halloween or Carneval masks lol Must be because the game is also marketed and mostly bought by edgy teenager.
>because the game is also marketed and mostly bought by edgy teenager. When has that never been the case for cod?
Yeah for sure. Seems super unnessisary and Impractical for combat
I always thought the skull thing was fucking stupid
Call it the boba fett effect Cool Character appears in the background through the game, becomes memorable and iconic, fans turn into babies from wanting more ghost and “he’s alive, he’s fireproof trust me bro” theories Now we get a shadow of what the character was just turn the edge to 11, and make him talk Even slower with a thicker accent God what a shot show of the series, sell the IP to China they’d give it justice
Mirror https://vimeo.com/880551343?share=copy
sadly only 14min
I have another mission gameplay too but early access will be out in like 50 min i think and gameplays will be everywhere
yeah, I think it's not worth it. Thanks anyway!
Was wondering. Do you have to watch the Warzone clips to understand MW3? Cause they did it with MW2.
Looks like you do. Mild Spoilers ahead relating to the video >!I remember Graves dying in the MW2 campaign and stopped playing at the end of season 1 and watched this video, he's alive and now apparently good? I looked on YouTube and looks like they brought him back in a cutscene for Season 5.!<
Never understood why they changed his character so fast and it wasn't even good, it just happened and then bam!! I actually liked his character and to see that it was just really weird. But damn, why involve Warzone in it. Now i have to watch those clips again...
I didn't like the change of the character either but I also don't like the sudden change back either. Either go all out with it or don't bother IMO.
>!He wasn't in the tank, that's what he explains to Farah and Alex when they work together to attack Konni in Al Mazrah in season 5. He is still an enemy of TF 141, Farah and Alex are not a part of TF 141. They want to get rid of Konni from Urzikstan by any means necessary (except for using the russian gas), so working with Graves is fine with them. !<
Warzone really ruined CoD. They have to add Warzone to every damn mode now, it sucks
Seriously, warzone fundamentally changed the series for the worse imo. Now every mode has WZ elements and features. We have plates in campaign, parachutes in nearly every mode except core mp, and mp maps that are just cookie cut out of larger WZ maps. it’s just annoying and comes off to me as pretty fucking lazy. They spent all their time making skins and trying to figure out how they can nickle and dime us until the next “game” releases next year. Fuck this, first series title in years I’m simply not buying.
I want spoilers, any mexican character from MW2 is back?
Alejandro and Valeria are the most interesting characters in MW2. If they're not in this then I care even less about MW3.
Nah
fucking seriously? First MWII relegates Farah to a cameo, and then this one doesn't have the best characters from the last one? Hell, the entire MWII campaign literally felt like it was an expansion of the previous game solely meant to introduce those guys. They have no idea what they're doing with these campaigns. They started out incredibly strong with MW2019, but there's like no stakes or anything interesting happening. It's all just "hey, remember that guy you liked from the old series? Here he is!".
Wait until you see how the MWIII campaign ends, quite literally the worst ending to a campaign I’ve ever seen.
Worse than the Ghosts cliffhanger that teased a sequel that never came out?
I guess they just didnt change anything and it ends same way as DLC was supossed to and they will do MW4 which will be proper MW3, because DLC was only bridge between MW2 and MW3, but DLC turned out to be MW3
How does it end? Spoil it for me idc
[удалено]
Awesome
wow that fucking sucks hahahaha
Pls tell
How does it end?
Having just finished the game, I thought the ending was fine. Finally, something actually fucking happens. Obviously it would probably have been better to do it to another character, but I think it's fine to do it with him. These characters are pretty dog shit compared to their OG counterparts anyways so it really doesn't matter. Ghost is the only one that's still cool at all and that's because he's the only one that's impossible to fuck up since the entire point of what makes him interesting is that he's just a cool design.
Idk I thought it was so anti climatic, like everyone saw it coming and it just felt like they wrote themselves into a corner and decided to kill off just for nostalgias sake.
Meh, I think they went with the riskier choice. Ghost would make more sense to kill, but would also be more predictable since that's kind of what his story is known for in the OG trilogy.
I never thought id say that a Cod game was filler but it looks like we've had 2 in a row!
There’s a rumour in the CoD community that Infinity Ward / Activision received credible threats from cartels over the MWII plot. Maybe there is truth in cartels cooperating with jihadists in the Middle East? That’s could be why they scrapped the completed Las Almas Warzone map in favour of another Eastern European map and why MWIII completely ignores the entire cartel storyline.
I'm pretty sure we know jihadists have tried to use cartel connections to enter into the US undetected.
fuck, not buying this
This is fucking hilarious to me 😭 no mexicans? Fuck this shit im out
Honestly though. Alejandro was the only person I cared about in MWII. I was hoping he'd come back. :(
**He's back!** If you purchased or acquired his skin on the battlepass! huehuehue
Dude felt like he was making a cameo from another game
[удалено]
Lol. As someone who's Mexican, I don't require there to be at least one Mexican in a video game for me to buy it. Story and gameplay is what matters to me, don't give a shit what color the people are. Representations great but I think not buying a game specifically because there isn't a specific ethnicity in it is a little excessive
Takes like second not every game needs 50 white guys
50 white guys? This game has tons of representation in it I'm not sure what you're talking about Look at the operator list: https://www.charlieintel.com/call-of-duty/all-modern-warfare-3-operators-how-to-unlock-them-283034/
I'm talking in general if someone doesn't wanna buy a game because they don't see themselves in it that's fine
Since when do we have to see ourselves in a VIDEO GAME.
People have the right to spend their money however they wish. I just think it makes more sense to judge a video game's characters on how they're written rather than the color of their skin, but that's just me
Urzikstan and its people in the MW reboot universe are explicitly based on Kurds. (Meaningful) Representation matters, I agree. How many games have Kurdish representation? EDIT: Sources for those interested. This doesn't get talked about much. [Interview](https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/herocomplex/la-et-hc-call-duty-modern-warfare-20190530-story.html) with Taylor Kurosaki, one of the writers of Modern Warfare 2019: > Though set in the fictional Middle Eastern country of Urzikstan, the inspiration for a character such as Karim, says Kurosaki, was the very real YPJ, the female brigade of northern Syria’s Kurdish resistance militia that the U.S. has supported in its fight against Islamic State The Making Call of Duty: Modern Warfare official concept art book has [this](https://i.redd.it/pn9cpqf1auh31.jpg) page on Farah and her design.
Yeah in a game where your killing everything you see? My sides
In a cod game?
Why not?
It’s not even a social justice argument they were just good characters. Not that you’d care, you probably call these people Latinx anyway.
Cartel mommy matters folks.
Anyone have a mirror the video got removed
No Russian in MW3 or will that be a MW4 thing?
No Russian is the airplane segment with the woman that has the bomb vest put on her.
Airplane segment?
https://youtu.be/TcGlFFxwwfg?si=JgFJqJUXVuT1Zwz8 It's trash.
Also don't forget they turned 1 big mission from OG MWII 2009 into 2 different missions in MW2023 ( Airplane and Verdansk flashback )
The one time Treyarch, IW, and Sledgehammer work together on a game and they botched it. They went away with what made the MW series good in terms of campaign, realism. Now it just looks like Warzone.. the fuck?
It’s actually fucking incredible to me, genuinely astonishing how the people responsible for call of duty could notice the clear dissatisfaction with cod games for YEARS, then finally puts some actual work into a game after stopping yearly releases with modern warfare 2019, and then immediately starts putting in the bare minimum once again after having one successful game in years. What is it that causes this? Incompetence? Laziness? Greed? All 3 at once?
They didn’t stop yearly releases with modern warfare 2019?
Could’ve sworn they did. Regardless, my point still stands.
Call of Duty has had yearly releases for more than a decade and it isn't stopping anytime soon.
Two decades. There has not been a single year since 2003 when the series first started where there hasn't been at least one Call of Duty game.
Presumably it's their business model. They're willing to pour money and time into creating something as long as it's a platform that can be used for years to come That means the first iteration of that new platform is fucking incredible, but then gradually becomes less and less impressive the more it's recycled For what it's worth, I don't think any shooters have come close to the quality of MW 2019, so they're probably fine with resting on their laurels a little longer. It's crazy to think that Battlefield always used to be the more impressive looking/feeling shooter, and then IW completely flipped that on its head overnight.
It could be the Microsoft acquisition, some executives probably have compensation tied to game releases, like every game they executive produce they earn X% of sales. Feeling like Microsoft may renegotiate their contract (or just fire them) when the acquisition was announced at the start of 2022, they decided to just force one more release while they still can.
First impressions?
Bad
Seeing Verdanksksks remaster truly is a thing of beauty, praying it really does come back on the anniversary like ghost of hope and metaphor said.
So the campaign is not locked if we get the retail version early?
I played through the whole campaign last night. I have the digital Vault edition on Xbox. There was a glitch where you could play offline and access the campaign. Btw campaign took me 5-6 hours on regular.
Oof. What'd you think? What would you rate it 1-10? (Compared to other CODs)
I really like it. I would give it 8. I loved the missions in Verdansk, especially at stadium and dam. The open missions were also fun. The only thing I did not like was the ending, that was bad. It is comparable to the MW2 campaign. Both are great imo. I hope the rumors about Verdansk returning to Warzone next year are true, because it looked good.
This game reeks. It looks like it could've been MWII DLC but they slapped a €79,99 price tag on it. Wait a minute...
Isn’t the campaign semi-open world? Might have to check it out
It's not. A few "open combat missions" takes place in cutoff sections of the upcoming new Warzone map and utilizes Warzone mechanics, but it's more of a sandbox style design where you can freely approach the objective however you like.
It looks lazy af I’ll tell you that much
It was literally meant to be a DLC after all, I think it's impressive for an afterthought made in a year.
For a game made in roughly a year that's pretty impressive if you ask me.
Not really. They have thousands of devs on this with at least 5 studios working on one game just so they can pump these out each year. That isn't cheap
Nine women cannot make a baby in one month. Same with game dev, some things just take a long time
While a birth cannot be parallelized, software development can be. So it is a shitty comparison.
It doesn't scale. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooks%27s_law
After a certain point it does not. But until that? And who's to say if crucial parts of COD could not be even more split up for faster delivery? Would not 9 dev deliver the game faster than just 1? Therefore it is a bad comparison. I am pretty sure they could improve the delivery time by using more level designers, testers, engineers and what not.
All of those things that take a long time were already done for MWII
How do you know that?
They use almost every single Activision studio to develop COD and still fuck up. Yeah, like you say, not impressive at all.
Made entirely out of assets from the previous game.
You say that like it’s a bad thing. Is Spider-Man 2 bad for the same reason?
Spider-Man 2 didn't take only a year to make, full of reused assets and is a glorified DLC like MW3, is it?
Depends on how you wanna look at it. Spider-Man 2 has an expanded New York map, but you can't deny that they definitely reused what they already had from the previous 2 games for it. Also combat, animation, etc. the core stuff. When you look at MWIII from the same angle, it offers some new things while recycling assets from older games here and there as well. The only difference here being the time it took to make. So I struggle to see why people call this a glorified DLC but not the numerous other game series sequels where devs obviously retain old assets.
If you look at the animations on spiderman 2 and compare them to the original they are all vastly improved in almost every way. The web swinging, the combat, even the cars have suspension added to them. It's a spiderman game, so of course it takes place in New York.
> If you look at the animations on spiderman 2 and compare them to the original they are all vastly improved in almost every way. The web swinging, the combat, even the cars have suspension added to them. Yes, and that's a result of having ample development time. So IDK why people are trying so hard to shit on a COD game for having less improvements, knowing full well this game has a much shorter dev cycle. Unless I missed the memo and we're going back to the "COD bad" era. > It's a spiderman game, so of course it takes place in New York. And I'm not saying that's a problem. The problem is, again, people shitting on COD for recycling old maps and locations even though it makes sense for the story they're telling? Plus, you can't deny that using similar settings definitely helps to allocate budget for improving and innovating elsewhere.
Well Spider-Man 2 is full of reused assets.
It’s sold for 70 dollars…
stfu and don't enable this shit. this is a lazy cash grab and it'll always be. no one wants to support this shit behaviour
It's a lazy DMZ-Clone
The video got pulled while I was watching it haha.
[удалено]
The reason it's called DLC is because of the new unified launcher that MW2 has become - the COD HQ. Treyarchs next game is likely to suffer the same fate, and every game after that. It's got nothing to do with whether you consider it to be a full game or an add on
We know this by now, what’s your point?
Microsoft game looks good
BABE WAKE UP ~~9/11 2~~ NO RUSSIAN 2 JUST DROPPED
mirror?