Outline ·
[ Standard ] ·
Linear+
Call of Duty : Modern Warfare 2, Autumn '09
|
Cheesenium
|
 Nov 4 2009, 03:32 PM
|
|
QUOTE(H@H@ @ Nov 4 2009, 02:57 PM) Its all in good fun... I mean, using an Apache or fighter jets to bombard a small area with random soldiers was also a bit overkill. Its not meant to be taken seriously. But all these kill streak ARE for hardcore players. Casual players won't be the ones that will be racking up high enough scores to get these toys to play with. Its very much an anti-balance feature which makes better players reap bigger rewards and punishes weaker players. This isn't a new issue, its always been there. I agree,but putting nukes and Ac130 takes to an even higher level of over-the-top-ness. I think some of the imba gonna be even obvious in MW2,im afraid. |
|
|
|
|
|
Qwristews
|
Nov 4 2009, 03:50 PM
|
|
|
im excited and prepare everything to play it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
AdamNg
|
Nov 4 2009, 03:56 PM
|
Getting Started
|
Same to u, already pre order although more than RM200 (actually RM204 only after redeem the point). Just hope the installation run smoothly without any trouble. Not like FEAR 2 before which give me a lot of trouble...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clavicus
|
Nov 4 2009, 04:32 PM
|
|
|
Well, good luck to you peeps who ordered the game, if by any chance it's playable by my own standards, i'll be joining you guys. Bout the whole taking mw to new heights, it was bit of a killjoy when I read bout "pro" perks and death streaks, but I told myself, it's IW right, can't be that bad. Epic mistake there. IMO helicopters are still okay, I mean spec ops are meant to get all the support they can get. For instance, the mission with the helo callsign Mosin 2-5 was believable, since according to McNab it takes millions to train one SAS trooper. Predator strikes are okay too, considering how we already have UAVs supporting soldiers on the ground. But nukes? This ain't StarCraft  |
|
|
|
|
|
Xonius
|
Nov 4 2009, 05:13 PM
|
|
|
Instead of calling it a Nuke, which is totally ridiculous, should've just called it "MOAB" (Mother of All Bombs) or something.
Anyway, i'll be watching closely the progress of this game once it is launched to determine whether its worth my money or not. I was really pumped when i first saw its trailer, but IW.....sigh.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Voxe
|
Nov 4 2009, 11:33 PM
|
|
|
Instead of "hax" being cried, "that guy is the f**king host, sh*t" will replace it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cheesenium
|
Nov 5 2009, 06:22 AM
|
|
|
^ Yeap,despite the fact that the host have almost 0 ping advantage,they still deny it.
Ridiculous.
|
|
|
|
|
|
SpikeTwo
|
Nov 5 2009, 01:33 PM
|
|
|
lol...we need a nuke to kill 9 enemies!!! ..ermm...that include our own troops. but war is about making small sacrifices.  bah... |
|
|
|
|
|
H@H@
|
Nov 5 2009, 02:27 PM
|
I'M THE TEAMKILLING F***TARD!!!
|
QUOTE(SpikeTwo @ Nov 5 2009, 01:33 PM) lol...we need a nuke to kill 9 enemies!!! ..ermm...that include our own troops. but war is about making small sacrifices. bah... Well during the Afgan war, American's dropped millions of dollars worth of munitions to destroy tents and untrained terrorists. So, nukes seem like the natural progression to when you have to kill trained soldiers. |
|
|
|
|
|
Cheesenium
|
Nov 5 2009, 02:52 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(SpikeTwo @ Nov 5 2009, 01:33 PM) lol...we need a nuke to kill 9 enemies!!! ..ermm...that include our own troops. but war is about making small sacrifices. bah... It seems more like an embarrassment for the opposing team. It's like saying: "you guys sux so much till we have to use a nuke to end the game."  |
|
|
|
|
|
SpikeTwo
|
Nov 5 2009, 03:25 PM
|
|
|
the problem is it will be too fake. lol...tho it is a game. the map is "small warfare" said IW, so imagine a nuke exploded, where my comrades gonna hide? away from the blast radius? in the bushes? like anti radiation bushes? lmao...or maybe kotick's nuclear proof house.
Added on November 5, 2009, 3:27 pmi thought the agfa war, US use MOAB only? is nuke involved?
they are trying to smash the caved in bandits right? unless we have caves warfare in MW2.
This post has been edited by SpikeTwo: Nov 5 2009, 03:27 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cheesenium
|
Nov 5 2009, 03:38 PM
|
|
|
http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2009/11/04/...s-wait-and-see/Well,MTV talk to Bowling on dedicated servers.As usual,wait and see. More typical bullshit from them. QUOTE "We will totally listen to your problems after you have played the game." Lets see how true is that.We'll see and im very "excited" to see the flames.
|
|
|
|
|
|
SUSDickson Poon
|
Nov 5 2009, 04:01 PM
|
Getting Started
|
I remember something like this taking over the games industry years back when I was still an avid gamer:
A focus on short development times and churning out as many titles as possible.
You have to understand that for traditional businessmen in the games industry, the console niche is the most profitable one that allows them to maximise profits and provide maximum returns to investors.
I remember back then also feeling aggrieved that not enough effort was being spent enhancing the gameplay experience for PC gamers. Heck, we couldn't even count on patches for damned bugs.
It seems that trends like these come in waves and cycles.
This post has been edited by Dickson Poon: Nov 5 2009, 04:10 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
H@H@
|
Nov 5 2009, 04:14 PM
|
I'M THE TEAMKILLING F***TARD!!!
|
QUOTE(Dickson Poon @ Nov 5 2009, 04:01 PM) I remember something like this taking over the games industry years back when I was still an avid gamer: A focus on short development times and churning out as many titles as possible.You have to understand that for traditional businessmen in the games industry, the console niche is the most profitable one that allows them to maximise profits and provide maximum returns to investors. I remember back then also feeling aggrieved that not enough effort was being spent enhancing the gameplay experience for PC gamers. Heck, we couldn't even count on patches for damned bugs. It seems that trends like these come in waves and cycles. Actually that's only half true now. Big game developers realize that yearly sequels need extra work behind them, so they've decided to go with 2 year development cycles instead. Thus, resulting in dual development teams being used for a single games franchise. Call of Duty is one example with IW and Treyarch working alternatively and another would be the Splinter Cell series with Ubisoft Montreal and Ubisoft Shanghai. |
|
|
|
|
|
Voxe
|
Nov 5 2009, 04:26 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE Infinity Ward, our affair has come an end. It has been long and glorious, filled with many frags and Nazis, terrorists and bombs. Alas, I can stand it no more, you have shattered my already fragile heart. I have tenderly loved you since your fledgling days. We have invaded Normandy by plane and boat, attack Romel, entered Germany and killed that basterd Zakhaev. We seen cities nuked, tanks destroyed and men die. But it is no more. You have decided to squander our love by removing everything we hold dear. Us PC gamers, unlike our console brethren, love to have control over everything. You should know that we hate it when you take things away. I could accept the new multiplayer system, it is ok to try new things now and then, but cutting the number of players? Take a knife to me before defiling yourself like you have done. I regret to say, there is but one avenue left... I have canceled my Amazon pre-order. I will be going back to the old love of my life, who has improved herself over these past few months whilst you have been playing in the gutter. Back to Battlefield, who can have more than 18 people at a time. Beautiful comment by Stndsh0 (kotaku.com) |
|
|
|
|
|
SUSDickson Poon
|
Nov 5 2009, 04:27 PM
|
Getting Started
|
QUOTE(H@H@ @ Nov 5 2009, 04:14 PM) Actually that's only half true now. Big game developers realize that yearly sequels need extra work behind them, so they've decided to go with 2 year development cycles instead. Thus, resulting in dual development teams being used for a single games franchise. Call of Duty is one example with IW and Treyarch working alternatively and another would be the Splinter Cell series with Ubisoft Montreal and Ubisoft Shanghai. Oh, that's news to me! Do they work concurrently also?  |
|
|
|
|
|
H@H@
|
Nov 5 2009, 04:30 PM
|
I'M THE TEAMKILLING F***TARD!!!
|
QUOTE(Dickson Poon @ Nov 5 2009, 04:27 PM) Oh, that's news to me! Do they work concurrently also? Yeah, pretty much. 2006 - Call of Duty 3 is released (Treyarch), IW works on Call of Duty 4 2007 - Call of Duty 4 is released (IW), Treyarch works on Call of Duty WaW 2008 - Call of Duty WaW is released (Treyarch), IW works on Call of Duty MW2 2009 - Call of Duty MW2 is released (IW), Treyarch works on as yet unnamed Call of Duty sequel |
|
|
|
|
|
SUSDickson Poon
|
Nov 5 2009, 04:34 PM
|
Getting Started
|
QUOTE(H@H@ @ Nov 5 2009, 04:30 PM) Yeah, pretty much. 2006 - Call of Duty 3 is released (Treyarch), IW works on Call of Duty 4 2007 - Call of Duty 4 is released (IW), Treyarch works on Call of Duty WaW 2008 - Call of Duty WaW is released (Treyarch), IW works on Call of Duty MW2 2009 - Call of Duty MW2 is released (IW), Treyarch works on as yet unnamed Call of Duty sequel How do they handle game engine changes or improvements? Blizzard seems to have a huge problem doing the same thing This post has been edited by Dickson Poon: Nov 5 2009, 04:35 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
Voxe
|
Nov 5 2009, 04:40 PM
|
|
|
It feels like a lose-lose situation.
If we don't buy the game, IW will not develope future PC games.
If we buy the game, IW will develope more nerfed-up PC games.
|
|
|
|
|
|
H@H@
|
Nov 5 2009, 04:41 PM
|
I'M THE TEAMKILLING F***TARD!!!
|
QUOTE(Dickson Poon @ Nov 5 2009, 04:34 PM) How do they handle game engine changes or improvements? Blizzard seems to have a huge problem doing the same thing Easy, have the lead developer (In this case IW), be in charge of the engine. The other dev team just develops on whatever engine is being used at the moment. Same for with the Splinter Cell games. |
|
|
|
|
Quote
0.0253sec
1.23
6 queries
GZIP Disabled