Ok so I bought COD MW3, which is unusual as 9/10 I rent videogames as I get bored of them after a week. But I bought COD as I can play the multiplayer for weeks on end... but I am dissapointed with the multiplayer.
I didnt like Battlefields multiplayer as with over 250 tickets a match it was inevitable you'd die 10 or 15 times a match which isnt so much fun, whereas in COD on a good streak you may only die a few times. But my problem with COD multiplayer isnt the increased speed (maybe it makes it more intense) nor the lower amount of damage it takes to kill someone (it makes sniping more realistic) but with the absaloutely shitty maps. Every area has at least 3 access routes so its inevitable you'll get shot in the back, plus the lack of open areas makes sniping pointless as there's no advantage plus you get shot in the back.
Then it occurred to me that like the last MW2 they might bring out a better map pack. Now my point is that Activision spent 10 years making alright WW2 games, but once they made COD MW1 they knew that whatever they churned out would get to number 1, so what did they do? Churned out another alright WW2 game (COD: World at War). Everyone knows that game was ruthless profiteering.
So now I have to wonder, are the map designs for MW3 really just crap or have Activision realised with the end of the storyline they will never make as much money with another COD game and will realease a map pack to squeeze the last pounds out of its customers?
I didnt like Battlefields multiplayer as with over 250 tickets a match it was inevitable you'd die 10 or 15 times a match which isnt so much fun, whereas in COD on a good streak you may only die a few times. But my problem with COD multiplayer isnt the increased speed (maybe it makes it more intense) nor the lower amount of damage it takes to kill someone (it makes sniping more realistic) but with the absaloutely shitty maps. Every area has at least 3 access routes so its inevitable you'll get shot in the back, plus the lack of open areas makes sniping pointless as there's no advantage plus you get shot in the back.
Then it occurred to me that like the last MW2 they might bring out a better map pack. Now my point is that Activision spent 10 years making alright WW2 games, but once they made COD MW1 they knew that whatever they churned out would get to number 1, so what did they do? Churned out another alright WW2 game (COD: World at War). Everyone knows that game was ruthless profiteering.
So now I have to wonder, are the map designs for MW3 really just crap or have Activision realised with the end of the storyline they will never make as much money with another COD game and will realease a map pack to squeeze the last pounds out of its customers?
