- Joined
- Aug 17, 2018
Is CoD still committed with this Marvel Cinematic Universe approach with branching stories and characters? That doesn't even make sense.
Call of Duty Thread - Potential return to form? Or nothing but cope on the horizon? You decide!
- Thread starter CreamyHerman’s
- Start date
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2019
5$ this gets walked back just like Alex did because muh battlepass
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2020
IGN pretty much tore the campaign apart in their review instead of just mindlessly handing out a 7-10 like usual.
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2018
- Joined
- May 2, 2021
I remember at one point in griffins streams that was spot on, where he said that the new MW campaigns feel like a single mission in one of the original MW games. These feel so small scale and there’s no stakes. Terrible campaign just like last year.
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2018
I wish Griffin would archive his streams either on a second channel or on Odysee or Rumble.
I know some people are archiving them but sometimes they miss parts or even entire streams.
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2018
They should've just stuck with their original plan of MWIII being DLC. And I'm not wasting 213 GB of storage for ONE game. Thank God for Game Pass come next year. Maybe I'll just catch The Professional's playthrough of the single player.
- Joined
- May 2, 2021
I wish he would do it like synthetic man where he delisted the streams but put them in a playlist.
Tepes Thot
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2021
Does anyone know who this is about? I know Spider-Man 2 is rife with writing shit out of a dying goat’s ass, so if this checks out…
From what I understand Sweet Baby Games had a hand in Spider-Man 2. For the love of anything holy left, please tell me they aren’t near COD. Even it doesn’t deserve that.
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2018
They weren't kidding.
Those "open ended missions" looks like a piece of DMZ gameplay. Hell, the weapon pick up UI looks like something you'd see from Warzone. Also, why on Earth is there armor pickups and armored enemies in CoD?
And the campaign is only four hours long.
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2018
Ashley Poprik (one of the writers of Spider-Man 2) indeed worked on MWIII.
As for Sweet Baby Games' involvment in MWIII, I don't know.
According to IMDB, here are the writers of MWIII:
I didn't know Brian Bloom was the lead writer on this one. I know he wrote and even starred in Infinite Warfare (pretty good campaign and setting).
Jennifer A Campbell worked on Agents of Mayhem and the Saints Row reboot.
Tepes Thot
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2021
Well there you go. I know about ESG, but it astounds me how a company can be so greedy, and yet so stupid. I’m a broken record, but I can’t break it apart.
I’m not just talking about politics either, I mean common sense business practices that will put you in the green and then some.
Hire a decent writer / hire worthless ones to counteract that
Make a tolerable team of guys that you can rebuild the franchise’s name with / Jk idiot, throw it away
Should we tone down mp, and revisit what made people seek it out to the point of the campaign eventually playing second fiddle? No dummy! Barely relevant celebrity appearances that will age like fettuccini.
Should we respect their dollar and not deliver what is obviously DLC as a separate game? Haha, you’re fired.
This period of entertainment should be a college course one day, it’s amazing.
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2017
No. I thought the first half of MWII was good, and then the second half had a lot of dumb missions and mechanics I hated, but I can at least remember some missions both positively and negatively. MWIII campaign doesn't have anything as annoying to me as the bad parts of MWII, but also nothing is going to stick with me positively and I'll probably forget all the story details before long. Just completely mediocre throughout, the plot points are introduced and resolved(?) without ever feeling like there's any consequence to it, and then it ends. You also don't see many new weapons, just the MWII weapons over and over. It felt like every single enemy was carrying the Vaznev SMG or one of the AKs. I played the regular difficulty and finished in around 4 hours. I died several times, failed due to hitting civilians or friendlies several times, and restarted several missions multiple times to try and get achievements. I would not be shocked to see people beating this campaign in closer to 3 hours.
The gimmick this year, the "open combat" missions, are being torn apart. I actually kind of liked a couple of them, but it doesn't actually add any value to the game. You can attack the objectives in whatever order you want - except completing one objective doesn't ever make the others easier or harder, so just complete the one closest to you first. You can choose your tactics, whether you want to go stealthy or guns blazing - except the stealth mechanics in COD suck and shooting people is more fun, so why waste time when you can just shoot your way through in 5 minutes. You can search the map for the orange warzone crates for special weapons or killstreaks - except finding an incendiary machine gun won't change anything about how you approach the level. When you repeat the open combat missions, you can choose your loadout from the stuff you found in the level on previous runs - except you're never going to play the level again. Even if you're an achievement whore, the only open combat mission that NEEDS to be replayed to get the achievement is the high rise one.
If someone ONLY cared about the campaign and would never touch multiplayer or anything else had asked me if I recommend MWII, I would probably have said "Ehh, 1st half is good, 2nd not so much, maybe worth game sharing with a friend/renting/getting a used copy for $15 or something". The same question for MWIII, I'd have to say "No".
Soap dies at the end of game. Makarov plants a bomb in the London subway, Price and Soap are working to defuse it. Makarov shows up with goons, kills Soap, then runs off to Modern Warfare IV. The bomb then gets disarmed, the team has a funeral for Soap, then the game ends. Second death comes shortly after during the post-credit sequence. Shepherd is in his office, Price shoots him in the face.
The closest thing to any betrayal I can think of is a cutscene before the final mission. Shepherd and Graves are in front of a congressional hearing. Shepherd says he did illegally send weapons to people but he did not order Graves to fire on Task Force 141. Graves then says that actually Shepherd DID order him to eliminate Task Force 141. So I guess throwing each other under the bus at a congressional hearing is sort of a betrayal, except its unclear to me either faces any consequences because Graves just isn't mentioned again and Shepherd dies as mentioned above.
The closest thing to any betrayal I can think of is a cutscene before the final mission. Shepherd and Graves are in front of a congressional hearing. Shepherd says he did illegally send weapons to people but he did not order Graves to fire on Task Force 141. Graves then says that actually Shepherd DID order him to eliminate Task Force 141. So I guess throwing each other under the bus at a congressional hearing is sort of a betrayal, except its unclear to me either faces any consequences because Graves just isn't mentioned again and Shepherd dies as mentioned above.
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2018
I thought the high rise achievement was a secret achievement with the multiplayer map. Good to know.
Melodramatic may be the perfect term to describe the rebooted MW trilogy.
How much do you want to bet they'll reboot Ghosts for next year or so? Hell, at least Infinite Warfare had a self contained conclusion.
Cod of War
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2018
I predict that the series will end just like OG MW3 but with Makarov killing Price to save Farah and she ends up killing Makarov.
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2018
Yeah, Call of Duty is not a pick up and play arcade military shooter anymore. SBMM, hefty download sizes, "meta" enabling, political soapboxing, overpriced bundles. It's too much to deal with.
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2021
My friends are absolutely losing their shit that I won't buy this game, and I'm just like "you all fucking HATED the game last year why the fuck are you buying this one?"
I even told them we could just keep playing MWII and they just scoff at the idea. They don't even play the games that much.
I don't understand the absolute need to own these games that casuals have.
I even told them we could just keep playing MWII and they just scoff at the idea. They don't even play the games that much.
I don't understand the absolute need to own these games that casuals have.
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2021
Nobody's allowed in the room who isn't a retard. Executives aren't young and have no idea what 20-year-olds want, so when the diversity consultant they hired says, "Modern audiences have changed. Today's gamers are more diverse than ever, and they expect representation," there's nobody around to say that no, she's a dumb bitch, people who play Man Shooting Other Mans are all guys and identify with whoever the coolest dude with the biggest gun is. So everybody just nods along, and it sounds reasonable to everyone, and then you get absolute bullshit characters like Farah, the Muslim woman who is inexplicably allowed to be in charge of the Moderate Rebels.
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2018
Buy the latest product, scoff the older product. Tell them that MWIII is basically MWII. You wouldn't be wrong.
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2019
She's a CIA spook. She rarely enters the battlefield, she does covert espionage and it makes sense why she'd go undercover.
Who goes undercover inside a Russian base?.
The autist with a mask, the Scott, The Negro, the Scot with non regulation haircut, or the Brit with non regulation haircut. That's one I won't criticize.