The Call of Duty Thread

[*IZ*]

Home alone all day. Which means CoD all day. unless if I get hungry. I'll walk to McDonalds. Lol. Anyone else going to be on instead of SGG so we can play zombies?

Edit: I just played in the best lobby. No one would talk smack and they would compliment you kills. I got some guy trapped in the corner and he was just Cracking up so I let him go. Those sort of people really make MW3 fun

[[ACE] Zero]

Home alone all day. Which means CoD all day. unless if I get hungry. I'll walk to McDonalds. Lol. Anyone else going to be on instead of SGG so we can play zombies?

Edit: I just played in the best lobby. No one would talk smack and they would compliment you kills. I got some guy trapped in the corner and he was just Cracking up so I let him go. Those sort of people really make MW3 fun

Ill send you the invite

[Ignika]

I won't be on for say, another hour at most. My dad got home and he got on my PS3.

[*IZ*]

I played zombies with randoms and got to 23. Thats pretty good. I got off because no one was online.

[An Enemy Spy]

As a story minded person, MW"we put a 3 on the box" just turned me off to the whole CoD series. MW1 and 2 were fantastic, with interesting characters, plot twists you don't see coming, and great finales with interesting villains. MW"we put a 3 on the box" just takes the elements that made it's predecessors work and recycles them. Remember how shocking it was was when your American character got killed by a nuke, or when Roach was murdered by the man you thought was on your side? Well, since those worked so well, we need to do another SHOCKING DEATH for the third one! And it is *dice roll*, Soap!
In the first two, the American subplot was gripping and engaging, with MW1 doing a good job of setting up the actual conflict and throwing you for a loop when you were killed at the end of it. In MW2, it's a thrilling and dramatic battle as you battle across the Washington D.C. area, culminating in the epic storming of the White House in a race against time set to what is easily the most epic piece of music in the game. In "we put a 3 on the box", it's an uninteresting subplot that never stays in one place long enough for the battles to actually seem dramatic, and they all die pointlessly anyway.
The final fight with Makerov is just garbage. No dialogue, no drama, just the same old crap where you look like you're about to die and then someone comes at the last moment and then you kill him. *yawn*.
And can we talk about Makerov? The previous villains were interesting and clever and were capable of outsmarting the good guys, evidenced by the nuclear explosion and Shepard orchestrating an invasion of the US so that he would be given all that emergancy power. Makerov is a freaking wizard. He is alkways 6 steps ahead of you and always is ready to thwart whatever it is you are planning. There is no real explanation for how he does this, and it comes off as cheap. It's the equivalent of Batman just happening to have shark repellant in case he ever needed it. At least that was done for comedy.
And his death is so anticlimactic.
I was so disappointed in this game. It's clear that Activision doesn't care about innovation and is happy to release the same game every year with a different number on the box. I am never buying another CoD game. After all, I have MW2, so I already own every game that will ever be made for this series.

[[ACE] Zero]

As a story minded person, MW"we put a 3 on the box" just turned me off to the whole CoD series. MW1 and 2 were fantastic, with interesting characters, plot twists you don't see coming, and great finales with interesting villains. MW"we put a 3 on the box" just takes the elements that made it's predecessors work and recycles them. Remember how shocking it was was when your American character got killed by a nuke, or when Roach was murdered by the man you thought was on your side? Well, since those worked so well, we need to do another SHOCKING DEATH for the third one! And it is *dice roll*, Soap!
In the first two, the American subplot was gripping and engaging, with MW1 doing a good job of setting up the actual conflict and throwing you for a loop when you were killed at the end of it. In MW2, it's a thrilling and dramatic battle as you battle across the Washington D.C. area, culminating in the epic storming of the White House in a race against time set to what is easily the most epic piece of music in the game. In "we put a 3 on the box", it's an uninteresting subplot that never stays in one place long enough for the battles to actually seem dramatic, and they all die pointlessly anyway.
The final fight with Makerov is just garbage. No dialogue, no drama, just the same old crap where you look like you're about to die and then someone comes at the last moment and then you kill him. *yawn*.
And can we talk about Makerov? The previous villains were interesting and clever and were capable of outsmarting the good guys, evidenced by the nuclear explosion and Shepard orchestrating an invasion of the US so that he would be given all that emergancy power. Makerov is a freaking wizard. He is alkways 6 steps ahead of you and always is ready to thwart whatever it is you are planning. There is no real explanation for how he does this, and it comes off as cheap. It's the equivalent of Batman just happening to have shark repellant in case he ever needed it. At least that was done for comedy.
And his death is so anticlimactic.
I was so disappointed in this game. It's clear that Activision doesn't care about innovation and is happy to release the same game every year with a different number on the box. I am never buying another CoD game. After all, I have MW2, so I already own every game that will ever be made for this series.

Cool Story Bro.

[xDoN904™]

I regret choosing the UZI as my 10th (13th - 3 from 14 prestige) gold gun. I decided to choose one my top 3 least kill primary gun to be gold for the challenge plus no one uses the gun since i don't use it much since the gun is garbage most of the time when i used it. I do get some good streaks every once in a while, but most of the time i get clearly outclassed by the likes of the Famas, AUG, Ak's and other common used guns.

might as well adapt to it. I am close to getting 1,000 kills total using this gun.

[Moneyy]

I am never buying another CoD game.

Not even the ones made by Treyarch? Black Ops 2 may have more differences from Black Ops than MW3 did from MW2. You can't say that every future Call of Duty game will be repetitive and boring just because Infinity Ward made one bad game. Also, you completely ignored the multiplayer aspect, which is the main attraction of the series. If you are just buying the game for its campaign, then you are wasting your money.

[*IZ*]

Cool Story Bro.

Bahaha.

Anyway. Played some all or nothing. I'm really enjoying that game mode. I do get pissed of when people shoot since I only use knives (makes it real fun and satisfying)

[Shadow XD001]

Bahaha.

Anyway. Played some all or nothing. I'm really enjoying that game mode. I do get pissed of when people shoot since I only use knives (makes it real fun and satisfying)

Most of the time, I don't even get to shoot because I get killed. When I get the chance to, I'll shoot. I do see why that could be annoying for some people.

Also, An Enemy Spy, why are you making such a big deal over Call of Duty's campaign? Usually people complain about the Multiplayer, but whatever. Besides, if you're only getting a CoD game for campaign, just rent it.

[An Enemy Spy]

Most of the time, I don't even get to shoot because I get killed. When I get the chance to, I'll shoot. I do see why that could be annoying for some people.

Also, An Enemy Spy, why are you making such a big deal over Call of Duty's campaign? Usually people complain about the Multiplayer, but whatever. Besides, if you're only getting a CoD game for campaign, just rent it.

Because the previous two were so good, and this one was a giant letdown. I'm not angry at it, just disappointed. Anyway, the Campaign is just as much a part of the game as any other aspect, so if it's not enjoyable, that's a legitamate complaint. And I don't play games just for the Campaign, it's usually the thing I'm looking forward to the most.

[Mr.Billehh]

I played zombies with randoms and got to 23. Thats pretty good. I got off because no one was online.

I'm on now lol but your not.

[[ACE] Zero]

Because the previous two were so good, and this one was a giant letdown. I'm not angry at it, just disappointed. Anyway, the Campaign is just as much a part of the game as any other aspect, so if it's not enjoyable, that's a legitamate complaint. And I don't play games just for the Campaign, it's usually the thing I'm looking forward to the most.

What lol, the campaign is the same thing regardless of how many times you play it but in MP or Zombies its different every single time. At least in my experience it is. But BO2 is supposed to change all that with those special options in the missions. Will you complain about that also??

[Cometk]

As a story minded person, MW"we put a 3 on the box" just turned me off to the whole CoD series. MW1 and 2 were fantastic, with interesting characters, plot twists you don't see coming, and great finales with interesting villains. MW"we put a 3 on the box" just takes the elements that made it's predecessors work and recycles them. Remember how shocking it was was when your American character got killed by a nuke, or when Roach was murdered by the man you thought was on your side? Well, since those worked so well, we need to do another SHOCKING DEATH for the third one! And it is *dice roll*, Soap!
In the first two, the American subplot was gripping and engaging, with MW1 doing a good job of setting up the actual conflict and throwing you for a loop when you were killed at the end of it. In MW2, it's a thrilling and dramatic battle as you battle across the Washington D.C. area, culminating in the epic storming of the White House in a race against time set to what is easily the most epic piece of music in the game. In "we put a 3 on the box", it's an uninteresting subplot that never stays in one place long enough for the battles to actually seem dramatic, and they all die pointlessly anyway.
The final fight with Makerov is just garbage. No dialogue, no drama, just the same old crap where you look like you're about to die and then someone comes at the last moment and then you kill him. *yawn*.
And can we talk about Makerov? The previous villains were interesting and clever and were capable of outsmarting the good guys, evidenced by the nuclear explosion and Shepard orchestrating an invasion of the US so that he would be given all that emergancy power. Makerov is a freaking wizard. He is alkways 6 steps ahead of you and always is ready to thwart whatever it is you are planning. There is no real explanation for how he does this, and it comes off as cheap. It's the equivalent of Batman just happening to have shark repellant in case he ever needed it. At least that was done for comedy.
And his death is so anticlimactic.
I was so disappointed in this game. It's clear that Activision doesn't care about innovation and is happy to release the same game every year with a different number on the box. I am never buying another CoD game. After all, I have MW2, so I already own every game that will ever be made for this series.

1) if you seriously cite soap dieing as a reason for why the game is bad you're a pussy. it's a war, people die. suck it up.
2) mw2 was the worst multiplayer call of duty. if you think it was the best then you're severely missing out.

[Moneyy]

Anyway, the Campaign is just as much a part of the game as any other aspect, so if it's not enjoyable, that's a legitamate complaint.

Not in Call of Duty. These games are made with multiplayer in mind as the primary aspect, and that is what most people look forward to. Campaign is a part of the game, however, and it is perfectly fine to be upset because the campaign was bad. What is not all right is when you say an entire series is bad just because of the campaign.

2) mw2 was the worst multiplayer call of duty.

MW3????

[Cometk]

MW3????

problems with mw2:
- completely unsupported. game was subject to glitches, hacks, and infections way before it was even out of its prime
- awful perk ideas and balance (one man army, commando, scrambler, scavenger replenishing claymores, stopping power being the only sensible second tier perk if you wanted to play the game how it was intended)
- game of explosives, not of guns
- risking good map design for gimmicky assets (think of the plane on terminal. what serious purpose does this have for the flow of the match?)
- bad spawning algorithms

problems with mw3:
- player collision
- bad map design in general
- lag compensation
- bad spawning algorithms (only reason why this was dysfunctional was because they wanted to go with the principle of keeping people in the action, which ended up not working particularly well)

[AJ]

Umm i think it can be debatable which call of duty mp was the worst, we all have our own opinions. Mine is that the worst is mw3 (mw2.5) but someone else may dislike Black Ops or Cod 2 or Cod 4 or WaW. Just stating your opinion to try to counter someone's argument doesn't really work....just saying.
#DebateTeamFor2Years

[Moneyy]

- completely unsupported. game was subject to glitches, hacks, and infections way before it was even out of its prime

I don't really mind the glitches and hacks. I rarely come across someone who's hacks hindered my enjoyment of the game.

- awful perk ideas and balance (one man army, commando, scrambler, scavenger replenishing claymores, stopping power being the only sensible second tier perk if you wanted to play the game how it was intended)

I agree with you here, though I never really minded any of these (except Commando).

- game of explosives, not of guns

Although some people did exploit noobtubes, many people also used guns how they were supposed to be used. Besides, Noobtubers aren't invincible.

- risking good map design for gimmicky assets (think of the plane on terminal. what serious purpose does this have for the flow of the match?)

I disagree. I thought that all the maps were great in some way.

- bad spawning algorithms

WAY better than MW3's.

Anyway, it is a matter of opinion. Yes, MW2 has many flaws, but I could deal with them, but I can't deal with MW3's. You may feel the opposite way.

[Cometk]

i guess xbox mw2 is a lot less hacked than ps3 mw2. every lobby in mw2 there're either kids with infection notifications that take up half the screen or there are kids with aimbots that shoot you through walls you didn't know existed or there are kids with god-mode or there are kids with fly hack or there are kids with whatever else they can think of to ruin everyone's gaming experience.

i know hacking isn't indicative of the game being bad because it isn't the developers' fault it's like that, but infinity ward could've done a better job with security than they did.

[Savvao]

They are still promoting the Nuketown 2025 bonus map.

I think that's the main attraction pre-order offer they want to give out.

Speaking of offer, the final pre-order offer is this month. I wonder what could it be...