I spent my first significant amount of time on MW3 multiplayer tonight

[RUINER ACTUAL]

I bring you a chart.

I'll use fairer than absolutely cheap tactics and still end up with a positive K/D. It actually got to a point in the original MW that I decided to use the m-14 just for challenge sake and found out that it was my favorite gun due to the simple premise of double tap.

I agree with this. I can't use cheap weapons, the game is too easy and not fun. The few times I've had to pick up a weapon like the Type 95 (think MW2 FAMAS but more powerful), I don't even feel like I have to think about playing. I avoid those weapons, and still have 1.55kd. I like making the teams that do use cheap stuff rage quit when they lose, and I feel surprised that people haven't switched over to other weapons when, for example, you run the noobs over with the M14. No one thinks, "he did good with that, I should try it," they would rather let the game spoon feed them kills.

 

[Anthony Wells]

And then on top of that, they used chemical weapons on civilian populations and then at the end simply make peace without any repercussions?
Those are just off the top of my head, two major things that at least needed to be addressed, even if it was implausible and stupid (like one missing ACS satellite allowing them to hack the US defense grid).

I think that was due to the fact that the US government discovered that Makarov was behind the war and chemical attacks, and the Russian President was actually trying to end the war but couldn't because of Makarov.

Then how and when did Makarov obtain control of the entire Russian military?

he was holding the presidents daughter hostage and threatening to kill her if he did not give into his demands

 

[WouldYouKindly]

snip

Not everyone is naturally good at video games (me) nor do many people have the time to spend on them to get really good at them (me again).

I commend you for being good at the game and having a positive KD ratio, but you can't apply that to everyone. I don't want to have to spend 100 hours leveling up and and trudging through bullshit to get to a skill point where I am good enough to have fun. Becuase those hundred hours are NOT fun for me.

I was just explaining the reasons why I personally don't like MW multiplayer. I never said or thought it should apply to everyone. I also dislike the amount of time it takes to level, even if you are good at the game.

 

[Sonic Doctor]

Even all of the game modes are locked until you get to level 20, which for someone like me is about 6 hours of crap.

Wow you are impatient. Only six hours to level 20 levels, most leveling games take three usually a good deal more hours to get that far in levels.

They are both shooters but granted they are of course different from each other, but look at Halo Reach. There are fifty ranks and it has actually been determined that with the daily credit earning limit of 120,000, if a person played everyday, only taking time out to eat and get minimal sleep, it would take that person six months to reach the 50th rank.

There is a piece of armor I want that costs 275,000 credits, that alone would take me around 6 hours or more over three days to get. Of course the armor is purely for show like all the credit purchases in Reach, but it is awesome customization of look.

Gameplay-wise, what I get is useless, don't get me started on the crap I had to deal with getting the rank of General, so far(which for me took more than a year). And I still love the game.

Though I don't agree on your stance on camping. I don't care what the situation, since it is done by military in real life, it is perfectly legal. If I get a greater advantage of winning with a shotgun by camping near a corridor that people frequently pass, I'm going to do it.

Edit: Three things I forgot to include:
1. the team making system sucks. I ALWAYS end up on the team of misfits when it puts all of the clans and parties together on the other teams so they can work together perfectly.
2. the spawn system sucks. waiting fifteen seconds to spawn right in the middle of a firefight only to get killed instantly is not fun. At all.

1.) Why shouldn't it put clans and parties together. That is the whole point of having clans and parties, so that the people in them can have fun playing together and working as a team. As long as their is room for the whole party, the whole party will be put on on team.

It works the same with Halo, and I would be pissed if I grouped up with three other friends and got into a team match but the game split us up on different teams, that negates the point of parting up to play a team game, if we wanted to kill each other, we would have just played a custom game or went into the free for all game.

I have been split up once when my friends wanted to play a 3vs3vs3vs3 game and I was the odd man out and got stuck on a team with team killing ass that kept sabotaging us because the voting picked a game type he didn't want to play. Yeah, it sucked, but shit happens. Some times you get stuck with a bad team.

2.) I haven't played a shooter where that didn't happen with spawn points. I've had it happen on some of the biggest maps in games. Sometimes there are battles at all spawn points, so what is the game suppose to do, not spawn you until there is a safe location?

I was in a Halo Swat match the other day and for the first two minutes, I would spawn up and die or take five steps and die. Again, shit happens.

------
You seem like a person that wants everything unlock and available the moment you put the game disk in. Many shooters in the distant past did that, and you know, that is probably why I never really liked them back then. With a game set up like that, I could experience it all in around 6 hours and then I would be bored of of it. Other than winning there would be no sense of achievement.

I hate games that don't make me feel like I've actually done something. Getting the rank of General in Reach would have been far far far less fun and satisfying if it had only take a day or two than a year and a month.

I haven't played MW3, but from the way you describe it, it sounds like a cakewalk compared to other leveling games and shooters I have played. I've never played a leveling and rewards system type of game that reaped anything substantial in the first 6 hours.

So be happy with your easy quick game, because 6 hours to get 20 levels, that is not level grind(In Reach took me almost a month of playing almost every day to get from Colonel grade 3 to General[5 ranks], and even when I first started playing the game so long ago, it took a couple weeks to go from Recruit to Warrant Officer[7 ranks], probably about 15 hours of or more play time over those couple of weeks).

Sorry for the rant, but I'm just trying to give you some perspective.

 

[Terminate421]

I only play team defender and demolition, those do require teamwork

The only thing that really does piss me off are the dual fmgs and the teammates who hump my leg while I am running. Do people have a concept of personal space at all in this game?

 

[ToastiestZombie]

You dont want to be put in games with parties? Then play mercenary team deathmatch.

TBH, the only thing that really pissed me off about MW3 was the massive amounts of EMPs going off, i've had an osprey gunner lost to those about 5 times!

 

[hensethe1]

Play hardcore dominion and Search&Destroy. They require more teamwork, but if you really want to try teamwork, you should find people to play with. Makes the game a much, much better experience, especially if you play S&D together.

As for your 6 hour grind of crap to be allowed to play hardcore? 20 levels does not take 6 hours, unless you're exceptionally bad.
The 20 levels are not there to annoy you or make your life tough. Its there to make sure that not every man and his dog go in and trolol play hardcore. If you're forced to play 20 levels before you go hardcore, atleast you'll have some game experience before you go into the gamemodes where you will get murdered just by twisting your ancle.

Spawning sucks because the gamemodes where spawning sucks are very dynamic and in constant movement. Any mode, be it dominion or TDM, have players move around very dynamically attempting to kill shit. If you camp, you'll most likely die because the enemey will at some point spawn ontop of you.

How are the maps the same as in MW2? In any way? Theres like 20 new maps in MW3, and I can promise you they are all made uniquely from scratch to make sure the gameplay works as the developers want it to. The maps in MW2 were good, but all had flaws. If it didn't have long open fields of snipedeath, it had short small maps of snipedeath. MW2 was sniping heaven, and that's been improved.
The new maps in MW3 are all significantly smaller and designed to keep the players moving, because if you stand still somewhere you'll most likely be killed from another angle. Campings harder, because there is very few places you can make a snipehut, packed with claymores n shit

Anyway cba writing anymore

 

[Amnestic]

Even all of the game modes are locked until you get to level 20, which for someone like me is about 6 hours of crap.

Wow you are impatient. Only six hours to level 20 levels, most leveling games take three usually a good deal more hours to get that far in levels.

They are both shooters but granted they are of course different from each other, but look at Halo Reach. There are fifty ranks and it has actually been determined that with the daily credit earning limit of 120,000, if a person played everyday, only taking time out to eat and get minimal sleep, it would take that person six months to reach the 50th rank.

There is a piece of armor I want that costs 275,000 credits, that alone would take me around 6 hours or more over three days to get. Of course the armor is purely for show like all the credit purchases in Reach, but it is awesome customization of look.

Gameplay-wise, what I get is useless, don't get me started on the crap I had to deal with getting the rank of General, so far(which for me took more than a year). And I still love the game.

The bolded section is the most important part. Your rank in Reach means jack-diddly-shit as far as mechanics go. It unlocks you new parts to make your Spartan (or Elite) look all pretty. Which I like, actually. It says "We still have a levelling mechanic, but we're not stupid enough to have it ruin the game's balance for us."

Unlike the Modern Warfare series, which decides that if you're a lower level, you're not allowed all the toys. And you have to unlock them in order (killstreaks excepted). It's an unbalanced way to make the game, stacking the odds against new players who already have the odds stacked against them for being, well, new.

 

[wooty]

Its the lag that killed my interest in it, always seemed like I was a second behind in a fire fight. Mixing in extreme lag with campers will always be the nail in the coffin for any game I play.

 

[bjj hero]

Normally I can get behind unlocking weapons and attachments too, but the absolute killer for me in this game (and in MW2) was the sheer effectiveness of them. Try to go head to head with someone running around with an EBR (level 60 i believe) while you've got an M4 or SCAR (both starting weapons) and let me know how that works for you.

And I completely agree with you on Hardcore. It made the came at least playable so having to level through 19 just to gain access to it was sickening.

I was lucky, Id been work all day and a friend had gone to lvl 19 so I piggy backed into hardcore. I never used anything other than the SCAR, funny how perceptions are different. SCAR did everything you need a weapon to do on Hardcore.

Im really enjoying MW3. Kill confirmed cuts down on camping (very few sniper rifles around) and Ive got a real liking for the shotguns. The perks and kill streaks have been watered down and I see that as an improvement. Its a shame you're not enjoying it. Heres hoping you find something more to your liking.

 

[Sonic Doctor]

Snip

The bolded section is the most important part. Your rank in Reach means jack-diddly-shit as far as mechanics go. It unlocks you new parts to make your Spartan (or Elite) look all pretty. Which I like, actually. It says "We still have a levelling mechanic, but we're not stupid enough to have it ruin the game's balance for us."

Unlike the Modern Warfare series, which decides that if you're a lower level, you're not allowed all the toys. And you have to unlock them in order (killstreaks excepted). It's an unbalanced way to make the game, stacking the odds against new players who already have the odds stacked against them for being, well, new.

Okay, I can see where you and the OP are coming from, but I still believe my point the complaint of just six hours of gameplay still stands.

I consider myself a pure gamer through and through, meaning I'd be pretty disappointed in myself if I started complaining that it took six measly hours to unlock some of the things I wanted.

The day start complaining like that is the day I'm some old fogy that believes I have just small amount of time before I die and I don't want my time wasted, and things can barely keep my attention for an hour before I fall asleep.

Of course my point is six hours is nothing, it's one weekend of gaming. Heck for the past almost two weeks practically every day, since Halo Anniversary came out, I've been playing at least 3 hours of Anniversary, Anniversary-Reach multiplayer, or just plain Reach multiplayer, just depends on which I feel like doing. Considering how long most Reach multiplayer matches take, three hours is at the most 20 matches, if I include some firefight into that, far less since it takes longer(Well unless everybody playing really sucks at it and dies really quickly, if there is a life count. Though that's not me. Firefight is simple credit boosting for me).

 

[Anthony Wells]

And then on top of that, they used chemical weapons on civilian populations and then at the end simply make peace without any repercussions?
Those are just off the top of my head, two major things that at least needed to be addressed, even if it was implausible and stupid (like one missing ACS satellite allowing them to hack the US defense grid).

I think that was due to the fact that the US government discovered that Makarov was behind the war and chemical attacks, and the Russian President was actually trying to end the war but couldn't because of Makarov.

Then how and when did Makarov obtain control of the entire Russian military?

he was holding the presidents daughter hostage and threatening to kill her if he did not give into his demands

Wow... This is so stupid. How the hell did they make peace without any repercuissions if the president was not so unwilling to kill I-don't-know-how-many people?

well just because no repercussions were shown doesnt mean there werent any. the game ends just days after the war so we dont get a chance to see if there were any repercussions. plus if your daughter the thing you treasure most in your life was kidnapped and they told you to kill hundreds of people and she wont be harmed..would you?

im not saying it was the right thing to do or there should be no repercussions there should and im also not saying there werent any cause the game ends before any could be had. just telling you the facts

 

[Amnestic]

Snip

The bolded section is the most important part. Your rank in Reach means jack-diddly-shit as far as mechanics go. It unlocks you new parts to make your Spartan (or Elite) look all pretty. Which I like, actually. It says "We still have a levelling mechanic, but we're not stupid enough to have it ruin the game's balance for us."

Unlike the Modern Warfare series, which decides that if you're a lower level, you're not allowed all the toys. And you have to unlock them in order (killstreaks excepted). It's an unbalanced way to make the game, stacking the odds against new players who already have the odds stacked against them for being, well, new.

Okay, I can see where you and the OP are coming from, but I still believe my point the complaint of just six hours of gameplay still stands.

I consider myself a pure gamer through and through, meaning I'd be pretty disappointed in myself if I started complaining that it took six measly hours to unlock some of the things I wanted.

The day start complaining like that is the day I'm some old fogy that believes I have just small amount of time before I die and I don't want my time wasted, and things can barely keep my attention for an hour before I fall asleep.

Of course my point is six hours is nothing, it's one weekend of gaming. Heck for the past almost two weeks practically every day, since Halo Anniversary came out, I've been playing at least 3 hours of Anniversary, Anniversary-Reach multiplayer, or just plain Reach multiplayer, just depends on which I feel like doing. Considering how long most Reach multiplayer matches take, three hours is at the most 20 matches, if I include some firefight into that, far less since it takes longer(Well unless everybody playing really sucks at it and dies really quickly, if there is a life count. Though that's not me. Firefight is simple credit boosting for me).

You know what? I consider myself something of a gamer too. And as a gamer, I think the perfect multiplayer experience is one which is balanced, such that skills and experience are the only defining difference between new players and old. Reach did this perfectly. Modern Warfare and Battlefield (3)? Not so much.

To me, it's not about the end goal ("what do these levels get me?") but the path you take ("what is getting these levels like?").

And that (along with a fair few other complaints I have against the series) is why Modern Warfare 3 will never be a good multiplayer game to me.

 

[Sonic Doctor]

Snip

You know what? I consider myself something of a gamer too. And as a gamer, I think the perfect multiplayer experience is one which is balanced, such that skills and experience are the only defining difference between new players and old. Reach did this perfectly. Modern Warfare and Battlefield (3)? Not so much.

To me, it's not about the end goal ("what do these levels get me?") but the path you take ("what is getting these levels like?").

And that (along with a fair few other complaints I have against the series) is why Modern Warfare 3 will never be a good multiplayer game to me.

I'm wasn't saying anything bad about you(I wasn't saying you weren't a gamer) nor was I discussing goals and such. I was just talking about the OP complaining about having to play 6 hours to get where he wanted to be, and how, in my opinion, 6 hours is nothing. People that believe 6 hours of game time is a lot, are either very impatient, or they have severe ADD and want instant gratification.

 

[Jinx_Dragon]

Then how and when did Makarov obtain control of the entire Russian military?

I'm going to assume after he captured the President.

After that I guess he then used the President to control the military.

Because we all know holding the President in duress guarantees obedience from the military to carry out suicidal missions.

Don't try and defend the Modern Warfare story line, it is a broken piece of crap that does not make any sense from start to finish. It wasn't meant to be a serious block-buster story here! This whole thing started because someone, likely management level with no writing skills, demanded there be a US on Russia conflict because he just couldn't let the cold war turning hot idea go. It became, quickly, nothing more then glue for a bunch of maps and half-baked 'military objectives' to be stuck together with and they didn't care about things like reality and common sense.

Let us not forget that the whole 'war' started because a bunch of Russian terrorists attacked a Russian airport and pretended to be US citizens. Something that would NEVER lead to a massive war between two first world nations, PR black eye at best, and doesn't explain the rest of the bullshit that happened ever since that point. I have yet to finish up MW3, but from what Yahtzee has put forth the insane story line continues to get even more unbelievable... wee.

Story is not something I would defend MW on, leaving very little this game has going for it. For someone who played hundreds of hours of MW2, cleared out all the of the achievements, weapons and everything like I suffered from OCD for that game... admitting the whole franchise started on a down note and slid further since. Sad isn't it?

 

[LetalisK]

So, for a discussion, was MW3 what you thought it was going to be? How was it different? Do you agree or disagree with my stated opinions on it? And finally, if you know how to help with some common problems (like glitchers and campers) state them.

Well, since you asked.....

The kill streaks and perks are completely broken, even more so than they were in MW2.

How so? I've noticed they've broken up certain perks(ie UAV jammer is now two different perks) and even kill streaks like EMP and Counter UAV have their own counters now. I actually think killstreaks and perks are better now then they were in MW2.

And pretty much all of the features they touted as new are ones you have to work your ass off level griding to get. Even all of the game modes are locked until you get to level 20, which for someone like me is about 6 hours of crap. I like Hardcore mode because it negates a lot of the bullshit the rest of the game gives and that takes until level 19 to unlock. I had to trudge through 19 levels of bullshit stair/floor glitchers, getting shot through walls and camping quick-scopers to get there. It's better now that I can play Hardcore, but it makes me mad that I had to work so hard to get there.

Hm. I can't say I've had to deal with any glitchers or wall hackers. I had one quick-scoper, but he didn't camp. And I think you are exaggerating getting to level 19. It's pretty quick, even if you hate the normal modes. And really, hasn't this been the same with every CoD game?

And not only that, what the hell happened to all the "team based" games they promised? Kill Confirmed? Bah. Not a team game. Everything is still "kill this many people to get this weapon/attachment". That doesn't exactly promote teamwork.

First, I don't think Kill Confirmed was marketed as a teamwork oriented game mode. If anything, it's a game mode intended to de-incentivize camping. So you should focus on the actual teamwork based modes like S&D and Domination. And even then, you can't force people to work as a team if they don't want to.

1. the team making system sucks. I ALWAYS end up on the team of misfits when it puts all of the clans and parties together on the other teams so they can work together perfectly.

Again, my experience has been different. I've been in far more tight matches then complete blowouts, unlike in MW2 and Blops.

2. the spawn system sucks. waiting fifteen seconds to spawn right in the middle of a firefight only to get killed instantly is not fun. At all.

Again, merely opinion, but I have the opposite problem. I seem to get spawned at the complete opposite side of where all the action is happening.

3. The maps are simply reworked versions of MW2 maps. Literally. They are laid out EXACTLY the same just with different skins and furnishings.

I don't get this one at all. In MW1, maps had certain strong points that if you could take, then you had a really good defensive position to start killing people from. WaW, MW2, and Blops did away with this(well, with a couple exceptions) and made maps where there were multiple ways to move and flank around an enemy. I think MW3 brought back having a few strong points on maps, but not to the point MW1 did. Also, I do notice certain themes being used again in MW3 maps, but they don't feel structurally the same to me.

Out of curiosity, what system do you have it for? I'm assuming 360 or PS3 since quickscoping is a non-issue on PCs.

Normally I can get behind unlocking weapons and attachments too, but the absolute killer for me in this game (and in MW2) was the sheer effectiveness of them. Try to go head to head with someone running around with an EBR (level 60 i believe) while you've got an M4 or SCAR (both starting weapons) and let me know how that works for you.

I'd probably do pretty well with either since M4 is empirically one of the best guns in the game. Not to say that it means a whole lot, since SCAR is actually pretty bad, but for some reason I don't do too bad with it and in Hardcore the differences between guns becomes less meaningful. Personal taste at that point, I suppose.

 

[Radeonx]

The only problem I have with MW3 are the sub par maps and the fucked up spawn system.
Everything else is great.

 

[ElPatron]

Though I don't agree on your stance on camping. I don't care what the situation, since it is done by military in real life, it is perfectly legal. If I get a greater advantage of winning with a shotgun by camping near a corridor that people frequently pass, I'm going to do it.

N-n-n-n-no, no!

First, MW != military.

Secondly, if you are a real soldier and decide to "camp" with your whole squad, take into account the following:
-- The world is not a "limited" map and the enemy will flank you unless you are surrounded by 90º valleys smooth as ice.
-- Walls can be destroyed, mortar fire will rain eventually, etc.




Now, if you tell me that your clan is in some super duper League and you guys camp after planting the bomb, it's fine by me.


But doing it in public games? People buy MW games for run & gun, not tactical "check every square millimetre of this room" gameplay that will end up on a bullet to the forehead and a 5 minute wait for the next respawn.



At least in Quake camping would get you owned. Sorry for the blatant elitism but I don't like it when half of the other team is camping but I am getting warnings for being in the same place while I try to stinger a AC130 to hell.

 

[ChupathingyX]

Because we all know holding the President in duress guarantees obedience from the military to carry out suicidal missions.

Don't try and defend the Modern Warfare story line, it is a broken piece of crap that does not make any sense from start to finish. It wasn't meant to be a serious block-buster story here! This whole thing started because someone, likely management level with no writing skills, demanded there be a US on Russia conflict because he just couldn't let the cold war turning hot idea go. It became, quickly, nothing more then glue for a bunch of maps and half-baked 'military objectives' to be stuck together with and they didn't care about things like reality and common sense.

Let us not forget that the whole 'war' started because a bunch of Russian terrorists attacked a Russian airport and pretended to be US citizens. Something that would NEVER lead to a massive war between two first world nations, PR black eye at best, and doesn't explain the rest of the bullshit that happened ever since that point. I have yet to finish up MW3, but from what Yahtzee has put forth the insane story line continues to get even more unbelievable... wee.

Story is not something I would defend MW on, leaving very little this game has going for it. For someone who played hundreds of hours of MW2, cleared out all the of the achievements, weapons and everything like I suffered from OCD for that game... admitting the whole franchise started on a down note and slid further since. Sad isn't it?

That was some uncalled for hostility.

And I'm not trying to defend it, if you payed attention you would notice I was explaining how disappointed I was when I played MW3's campaign.