Modernised: COD:MW3 Spec Ops Trailer

By Jim Rossignol on August 9th, 2011 at 9:22 pm.

He's off to shoot some men. What have YOU done today?
How about this, then, man-shooting fans? Over two Imperial minutes (count ‘em!) of Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3′s Spec Ops survival mode can be found below, via BluesNews. What is it? Well, I dunno. Let’s say it’s some kind of escalating fight mode, with its own perks and stuff, featuring lots of different opponents: dogs, men, men, men, big armoured men.

Big. Armoured. Men. So big. So armoured. So shootable. Mmm.

__________________

« | »

, .

159 Comments »

  1. PleasingFungus says:

    Dogs! Men! Men!

    I can honestly say I have never been so excited about a Modern Warfare game.

  2. RF says:

    How may times can the same game be released?

    Guitar Hero suggests eleven.

    • ZIGS says:

      It literally looks just like the previous ones

    • MrWeed says:

      Wait, I actually spotted a difference.
      You can put red-dot sights onto the Model 1887 shotgun now.
      Now THAT’S Modern Warfare!

    • CaspianRoach says:

      You can put a silencer on a shotgun in Crysis 2. Beat that.

    • JerreyRough says:

      Now here’s a question: If they labeled this as an expansion and priced it as such, would you buy it? Or rather if they labeled them as standalone expansions, would you buy them? Because they have more in relation to an expansion than a full game release, though perhaps lacking a bunch of the quality that expansions normally have (see: Mount & Blade, Warcraft 3, etc).

    • Ringwraith says:

      You can put a sniper scope on a shotgun in Crysis. Although they have the range to use it and didn’t disintegrate after about 6 feet (if you’re lucky).

    • JerreyRough says:

      Ah, scopes on shotguns. Remindes me of Borderlands sillyness.

      In MW2 you could throw silencers on shotguns. I don’t remember if you could in Black Ops though.

    • Askeladd says:

      I want to remind that no game that I know of has portrayed shotguns in all their frightfulness.
      They are deadly beyond 5m, ignoring what most games with guns want us to believe.

    • Zenicetus says:

      WRT shotguns, the choke upgrade for the Hunting Shotgun in Fallout New Vegas decreases spread by 40%, compared to the stock shotguns that have a typical gamey short range. So it feels a bit more realistic, even if what you’re shooting at isn’t ever realistic.

    • Vandelay says:

      “If they labeled this as an expansion and priced it as such, would you buy it?”

      You know, I probably would. I quite enjoyed MW1 and had quite a bit of fun with the multiplayer. No matter what anyone says, they are good, solid shooting games. In fact, watching this video made me want to crack out MW1 again.

      But, I just do not see the point in buying MW2, BLOPS or this when they are pretty much identical games that never drop below the £20 price tag. If this appeared in a Steam sale for under £10, I would probably get it.

    • Ringwraith says:

      @Askeladd Crysis actually had them pretty close, like I said, there was a reason why you could attach a sniper scope to a shotgun, as if set to “narrow spread” it was frighteningly accurate, whereas it also had the “wide spread” setting which made it a typical video game short range shotgun.

    • DeltaRanger509 says:

      You know, no one is forcing you to buy this game. I’m sure that’s suprising for you, but it’s the truth. My brother and I still LOVE the Infinity Ward installments in the CoD series and we play them together all the time.

      Guitar Hero was literally the same game with different songs each time, and it was a gimic game in the first place. CoD is a manshoot and manshoots are almost as old as video gaming itself. They do iterate every time. MW2 has some massive multiplayer improvements over MW1 and the graphics engine shows distinct evolution over the course of the series. Unlike GH games, which sputtered out, each CoD game release breaks more records and gets more sales than the last.

      If it’s not your cup of tea, no one is forcing you to play the game or read the stories about it.

    • jon_hill987 says:

      @Askeladd: id Software seem to have grasped that at one point, the shotgun in Doom had a realistic range (the pump action not the double barrelled sawn off). Sure it was better close up but you could easily take down enemies at range with it.

    • Zogtee says:

      I have MW1 and 2 (and Black Ops). I have played these games in a sort of gradually falling curve. A fair bit of MW1, less MW2, because I felt like I had already done this, and very little Black Ops, because again, I felt an overwhelming sense of deja vu.

      MW3 looks nice and I think I recognise some new bits here and there, but for all I know the rest could be footage from the previous games. I don’t *want* to unlock all those soddin guns again!

    • Optimaximal says:

      I can’t read DeltaRanger509′s comment without picturing him and his ‘bro’ fist pumping and chest banging as they kick more ass and take names of the dead.

      I guess it’s the Xbox 360 way!

    • mejoff says:

      Wow, Optimaximal, nice of you to pointlessly insult someone for having fun.

    • Ultra-Humanite says:

      That’s funny, Optimaximal, because I can’t read your comment without coming to the realization that you are a total jackass.

    • Dhatz says:

      Urge to Wroom suggests infinitely, at least as long as they keep the arcade drivings.

  3. Guyver says:

    have you see the kills with the pistol? the ai was completely retarded. (no, i dont think its because of that “wave” game mode )
    the trailer seems nice, but bf3 its soooooo better than this.

    • Danny252 says:

      Not just me who raised an eyebrow at that, then.

    • JerreyRough says:

      But, but, but he was running for cover! After all, he’s being thrown at a demigod with wolverine’s healing powers with nothing but a crap-tacular shotgun!

    • whydidyoumakemeregister says:

      Was that even supposed to be AI? I figured it was just the enemy players intentionally grouping together and walking into gunfire for the demo.

    • ghiest says:

      Having played some Bf3 alpha, I’ll be passing on it unless they change some major things (unlikely) read any FPS forum you will find out what major flaws it has right now. Not to say I’ll be buying MW3 either to be honest. Unless it has something that really sets it apart in MP and less cheap ass kills (too many to count in MW2) then ill probably just stick with Red Orchestra 2. All these people screaming that BF3 will wipe the floor with CoD are quite deluded really, sure it can look pretty but the game play is pretty much a screw up of Medal of honour (yer that sold real well) and BFBC2 and as far as I can see bares no relation to Battlefield what so ever.

  4. CaspianRoach says:

    I’m sick of these player character movement animations, they have no inertia or mass behind them.

  5. MrWeed says:

    Hahaha…
    It looks exactly like Modern Warfare 2. Same HUD, same guns, same enemy animations.

    This is poor.

  6. OddsAgainst says:

    Ahh so WW3 will start because MW3 will not sell well. The world makes sense now.

  7. TimA says:

    M3H.

    It saddens me that people buy this crap, and they get away with releasing the same shit over and over again.

    • Fierce says:

      If earning a business degree has taught me anything succinct, it is “Never bet against consumer stupidity.”

      If you want to be rich, a sure-fire way is to produce a product or service that is highly visceral to induce addiction via adrenaline spikes, can be spread via almost meme like behaviour (“I bought an iPhone/iPad/MW game/BMW because my friends have it”) and which you can feasibly price gouge for extra profit just for the brand(“New MW Map Pack! Retribution 4! Reparations harder! Only $19.99!”) and watch your customers do exactly the opposite of what a critically thinking, rational human being would do.

      Then call those thinkers fringe elements, marginalized, or some other Us vs. Them terminology to further infuse your product/service with exclusivity and communal polish. Finally proceed to visit your bank account every couple of days while laughing to the sky.

      Also, I agree with the “HOLY RECYCLED ANIMATIONS BATMAN” this trailer espouses. As for the wonky AI on display when the player is using a Pistol… well… this is the X360 crowd we’re talking about. Can’t make it too cerebral you know?

    • Felixader says:

      @Fierce: Your comment was fine till you came to the 360 shit.

      I have a 360 and i play it very often. that doesn’t mean that i am happy with the poor standart of the current Enemy AIs in games.
      And i don’t play MW, but whatever.

    • StingingVelvet says:

      @ Felixander

      360 audience = more mainstream audience = less demanding audience. That doesn’t mean everyone who uses one is though. Statisticians and business people speak in stereotypes, which they call market trends or consumer profiles.

    • jay35 says:

      @Fierce: “If earning a business degree has taught me anything succinct, it is “Never bet against consumer stupidity.””

      ALWAYS BET ON BLA^H^H^HSTUPID

    • Fierce says:

      @Felixader
      Perhaps my use of cerebral was too targeted to the individual to convey my meaning. Let me clarify.

      The very nature of a console as a low cost, gaming only, entertainment add-in module for your living room means that barriers to entry are exceedingly low or non-existent. In other words, it is a product that can be equally bought by an intellectually progressive adult looking for some downtime between project milestone deadlines and an exasperated single mother looking for something to distract her undisciplined bratty noise maker with. While both extremes are possible, clearly what is likely is that the demographic of the majority users are in the middle, and with the pedigree of Xbox 1′s Halo and the time it was introduced (as a competitor to the PS2), probably skewed in the immature/young child direction rather than the mature/young adult direction. While I’m sure people such as yourself, myself and others are a part of that mature/young adult group, our individual anecdotes are meaningless in the face of educated inferences about the market segment being targeted by multi-million dollar business efforts, or of that segment’s huge footprint in the profitability of these efforts compared to our paltry contributions.

      But let me speed things along. A console can be bought by anyone but is targeted towards the young. It also can’t be too hard to use as the consumers are, of course, younger. Enter the gamepad, which has to be designed for simplicity and tailored to be learn-able given time. So now we come to how Thumbsticks don’t hold a candle to Mice, are either stuck in a single movement mode (which translates into Mouse Smoothing being On By Default in our shitty PC ports) or a hilarious two-stage movement mode where it goes Too Slow For Reflexes > Too Fast For Accuracy, a la Darksiders and similar. Now Modern Warfare has admittedly found a sweet spot for Thumbstick responsiveness, but those who still have the Gaming Memory to feel it still sense that Goldeneye64 tactile feel to the attempt. So with such “limited” controls, for a game to be fun, it naturally has to be balanced against the control scheme of the player or it’ll be squashed in the Design/QC phases. And being killed by AI that you can’t react to and defend yourself against, definitely isn’t fun.

      So you wind up with the enemy AI on display in the Pistol shooting scenes of the trailer. Dumbed down possibilities for dumbed down player capabilities. (And I’m not even going to start into how console players react differently than PC players when “a game is too haaaaaaaaaard!”)

      Behold, how my mind works.~

      So…. yeah, cerebral maybe not the word I should’ve used.

    • gwathdring says:

      A lot of PC gamers react the same way to games that are too hard. There are just a lot of very vocal PC gamers that enjoy difficult games and an even louder group of PC gamers who are damn proud and sometimes a bit condescending about it. We get all kinds here. There are just more hard-core junkies on the PC, bless them, because console games aren’t typically friendly to them. I forgive those among them that get annoying, because their patronage brings us games like VVVVVV which was amazing. And Arma II which I’m looking forward to trying out.

  8. JerreyRough says:

    This really should just be an expansion. Expansions often advance the story (even if there barely is any) and include more things like weapons, new game modes, and gameplay extentions to current modes. I.e. Expansions for strategy games.
    I guess Activision found that people tend to buy new games more than expansions?

    • Bilbo says:

      Yep. They should continue the long tradition of console games that have expansio-

      Oh, right.

      Why can’t we be happy that there’s some new gameplay on offer here? It could so easily have just been campaign, multiplayer, and zombies or challenge mode or whatever. The whole UT Invasion Mode thing is a lot of fun and I’m sure a lot of people will get a kick out of it.

    • MrWeed says:

      “New gameplay”…
      Haha, good one.

      Ever played the Spec Ops mode in Modern Warfare 2?
      It’s basically the same but with new guns and air support.

    • Bilbo says:

      Did YOU play it?

      Because the Spec Ops mode in MW2 was a series of challenge missions, and this is Invasion from Unreal Tournament.

      You fail, hard, and your derisive laughter was both rude and as it happens misplaced, because you’re wrong. Allow me to laugh back, harder – AHAHAHAHAHA thinks he’s right but he’s wrong aAHAAHAHA laughs but the laugh is on him AHAHAHAHHAHHHHAAH

    • MrWeed says:

      I DID play it.
      And there were a few missions in which you did exactly the same as in the UT invasion mode:
      Fighting off waves of enemies that grow stronger over time.

    • Bilbo says:

      There were a couple. There were also a whole lot of very different missions. Saying “This is the same” is totally fucking wrong, get a grip.

    • MrWeed says:

      Modern Warfare games including something they didn’t include in one of their previous games?
      You get a grip, sir.
      I’ll leave you to your dream world now.

    • Bilbo says:

      They’ve clearly developed it into a game mode, and as such it’s something new for players – now I’ll leave you to your patronising shit, your misplaced derisive laughter, and your pessimism and “look at me guise! i hait activision too! MW sux i neva play it only fucking console kids play it! guise! please be my fwend! my life is dark and cold :( and I have diseases :( “

    • Grundig says:

      *lovingly puts a blanket around Bilbo’s shoulders* calm down dear, lets get you a nice cup of cocoa and try to remember that its only a gaming blog comment section. Theres no need to get so consistently riled up and sweary every time you post something.

    • Grape says:

      God, how I love how hilariously butthurt Bilbo sounds.

    • godgoo says:

      i like to feel superior

  9. jamie says:

    So is it 2 player co op again cos that was fucking cool. If they did that again but with more story it would be wicked! Ive played that AC13 level with my mate about 50 times

  10. NAZIUFOCOMMANDER says:

    I’m not interested in COD games, but this looks like a fun game mode if the maps are well made.

  11. Hensler says:

    People wouldn’t buy this “crap” if they didn’t get enjoyment out of it, and nobody is forcing anyone to play it. Games are meant to be fun, and for millions of people these games accomplish that. Quit bitching about it – everybody knows that the PC elite are too cool and sophisticated for these games, you can quit reminding us.

    • Raziel_Alex says:

      What I want to know is how some people spend around 40-50 Euros once a year for the same game. It has no essential difference compared to MW2 or BO. Really, why don’t they take a 2-3 year pause for something really new? Why don’t you people just play MW2 for 5 years? Every COD game is just the one before it with unessential fluff.

    • Koozer says:

      Modern Warfare 1 was actually good. You could shoot through walls! It had mods! It had custom maps! I bought MW2 on the strength of the first and was disappointed with the ridiculous killstreaks, no mods and no technological advancements whatsoever. I bought Black Ops for multiplayer zombies and less ridiculous killstreaks. I will not be buying MW3.

      There you go, a rational explanation.

    • Raziel_Alex says:

      Yeah, rational enough. I’m not trying to be fanatic in this, but it’s almost becoming hard. I played a bit of all of them, except WaW. I tried to like them, really, that’s why I bothered with them in the first place. But really, in the single-player, they are nothing more than glorified arcade shooters. I also tried MP and just ran back to Crysis 2. I can understand their appeal to Americans, because of that patriotic bullshit. But every year it’s the same damn game – and not some incredible game, either – with about 5-10 % new stuff. I find it incredible how BO has sold over 20 million copies and MW3 will sell even more and games that push the medium forward, like Amnesia, barely sell 400K in one year. If there’s one product that clearly shows the power of marketing, CoD is it.

    • Koozer says:

      I wouldn’t necessarily say the power of marketing alone, but the power of a widely popular genre combined with a nice safe setting and…accessible gameplay. I’m sure if Activision put the same marketing effort into Alien Accountancy Simulator 2011 it wouldn’t sell half as well.

    • mejoff says:

      I’m a committed PC gamer who likes RTS and RPG games and indie things and all that good stuff, I still enjoy the single player MW campaigns, which is why I’ll probably get MW3 eventually, I’m enjoying the story.

      And @Raziel Alex, if you haven’t noticed the satirical nature of the ‘patriotic bullshit’ then you don’t get to imply ignorance in others.

  12. torchedEARTH says:

    Thank goodness for COD games!

    Just let that sink in a moment. Now, what I mean is, all the people who can play the same pap year after year won’t be clogging up the BF3 servers.

    • elvis says:

      +1
      You, sir, just stole the words from me. :p

    • Rii says:

      2002 – Battlefield 1942
      2003 – Battlefield 1942: The Road to Rome
      2003 – Battlefield 1942: Secret Weapons of World War II
      2004 – Battlefield Vietnam
      2005 – Battlefield 2
      2005 – Battlefield 2: Modern Combat
      2005 – Battlefield 2: Special Forces
      2006 – Battlefield 2: Euro Forces
      2006 – Battlefield 2: Armored Fury
      2006 – Battlefield 2142
      2007 – Battlefield 2142: Northern Strike
      2008 – Battlefield Bad Company
      2009 – Battlefield Heroes
      2009 – Battlefield 1943
      2010 – Battlefield Bad Company 2
      2010 – Battlefield Bad Company 2: Vietnam
      2010 – Battlefield Online
      2011 – Battlefield Play4Free
      2011 – Battlefield 3
      2011 – Battlefield 3: Back to Karkand

      What’s that saying about stones and glass houses again?

    • Nalano says:

      Jesus Christ, Rii, that list just makes me hate EA even more.

    • Koozer says:

      You can’t really put Heroes and that free 2 play monstrosity in there, they aren’t even made by DICE. Yeah I know Treyarch make every other CoD. You also seem to have put expansions in there for some reason.

      Just compare the differences between 1942/BF2 and Vietnam/2142 with MW1/MW2 and WaW/BlOps – at least DICE tried.

      And before the internet shouts at me, I own every CoD from MW1.

    • Nalano says:

      I’m kinda the reverse. I own every CoD until MW1.

      I find that to be the better situation.

    • Rii says:

      @Koozer: Yeah, there a lot of ifs, buts and maybes there. But there’s no disguising that EA is whoring the franchise for all that it’s worth. BF groupies acting like their chosen team is all superior here don’t have a leg to stand on.

      Incidentally I’m actually vaguely interested in MW3, not having played a CoD game since the PC original. I’m leaning towards RO2+MW3 over BF3 at the moment, primarily on account of MW3′s more interesting singleplayer and RO2 being unlikely to nickel-and-dime me as much on the multiplayer side of things post-purchase. Could go either way, though. Or neither.

    • D3xter says:

      Cutting down that list to the essentials you get:

      2002 – Battlefield 1942
      2004 – Battlefield Vietnam
      2005 – Battlefield 2
      2006 – Battlefield 2142
      2008 – Battlefield Bad Company (Console Title)
      2009 – Battlefield Heroes (Free2Play Title)
      2009 – Battlefield 1943 (Console Title)
      2010 – Battlefield Bad Company 2
      2011 – Battlefield 3

      I don’t think counting Expansions and Map Packs is quite “fair” or you want to include them on the Call of Duty side too… what are they at right now for their latest game only… the 3rd or the 4th? And Battlefield Expansions like the “Vietnam” one actually felt like Expansions and not glorified map packs that Activision releases.

      That said, they changed and added things in each and every title, first it was classic WW2 combat, modern middle eastern combat and they tried that future thing, it backfired in both quality and sales upon which they took a four year break from the PC, making their Comeback with Bad Company 2, which added the Destructibility elements and a lot of other stuff using an all new engine.
      Same thing with Battlefield 3, it’s their return to the Battlefield 2 formula but all new with improved Animations, Lighting, Destructibility and all that…

      Activision has been Re-Releasing the same game since approx. 2007 with barely any actual changes and just a different 4 hour SinglePlayer Campaign.

    • Koozer says:

      Yes. The frequency might be similar but the effort is significantly higher.

      For the record, 2142 is my favouritest Battlefield.

    • Spider Jerusalem says:

      @Rii

      Well that list is pretty and all, but the argument against CoD isn’t that it comes out every year, it’s that it’s the exact same shit every year (or worse, it appears to be moving backwards, since the best game in the series was the very first CoD).

      Meanwhile, the Battlefield series has blown through locales, time and advanced the engine significantly.

    • Nick says:

      Wow, nice load of toss to try and make some sort of failed point there Rii, now try listin the CoD games from CoD 1 onwards and including all their expansions and DLC, yes include map packs as well as they cost about as much as an expansion and you decided to list those for BF series too.

      Oh wait, there have been about 5 released for black ops alone, that might make your “point” look rather weak.

    • Rii says:

      Gotta love the fanboys comin’ out to play. Aww, were you offended at having it pointed out that BF is as much a soulless production line franchise as CoD? Go shoot some mans and unlock a ribbon or somesuch shit to make it all better.

    • Koozer says:

      Aah Rii, you were in danger of sounding like a rational human being with a sensible discussion point before.

    • Rii says:

      @Koozer
      There’s nothing to discuss. Anyone who would defend the record of the Battlefield franchise in this respect is clearly deranged. One might as well compare and contrast the moral qualities of Hitler and Stalin.

    • Dagda says:

      I have decided to include the console games as Rii did and also the map packs, since that is what most of the Battlefield expansions have been:
      2003: Call Of Duty
      2004: Call of Duty: United Offensive
      2004: Call of Duty: Finest Hour (Console)
      2005: Call of Duty 2
      2005: Call of Duty 2: Big Red One (Console)
      2006: Call of Duty 3 (Console)
      2007: Call of Duty: Roads to Victory (Console)
      2007: Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare
      2008: Call of Duty: World at War
      2008: Call of Duty: World at War: Final Fronts (Console)
      2009: CAll of Duty: World at War: Map Pack 1
      2009: CAll of Duty: World at War: Map Pack 2
      2009: Call of Duty: World at War: Map Pack 3
      2009: Call of Duty: Modern Warfare: Moblilized (Console)
      2009: Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2
      2010: Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2: Stimulus Package
      2010: Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2: Resurgence
      2010: Call of Duty: Black Ops
      2011: Call of Duty: Black Ops: First Strike
      2011: Call of Duty: Black Ops: Escalation
      2011: Call of Duty: Black Ops: Annihilation
      2011: Call of Duty: Black Ops: Rezurrection
      2011: Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3

    • gwathdring says:

      … you know, even as a Battlefield player, I was with you argument-wise. Then you had to go and bring Hitler into things. Well done, sir. You should feel proud.

      Fanboys for the respective franchises are not exactly like Hitler and Stalin. Also Hitler and Stalin are not so similar they merit no comparison or discussion whatsoever. There are things to be gained from analyzing either figure and comparing their crimes, philosophies, and places in history.

      Unless you just want to vomit up the two easiest negative connotations your dignity will allow. In that case, proceed.

    • Spider Jerusalem says:

      @ Rii
      No one is defending EA against your strawman. We’re just pointing out that your list didn’t accomplish what you thought it accomplished. But here I go throwing logic down the well of the internets again. Because clearly someone who progresses from semi-coherent-yet-cutely-wrong point to calling people fanboys and then dropping the old Hitler standby is flawed chemically.

    • Rii says:

      @gwathdring

      You should probably read up on how analogies work.

      @Jerusalem: “We’re just pointing out that your list didn’t accomplish what you thought it accomplished”.

      It did if you’re not a fanboy.

    • Spider Jerusalem says:

      :dustshands:

    • gwathdring says:

      Reply fail.

    • Eukatheude says:

      I hate how this game can almost turn into flamewars even RPS comment threads.

    • Rii says:

      @Eukatheude

      Except that this isn’t really about CoD. It’s about Battlefield fanboys pretending their shit doesn’t stink, which of course is part and parcel of the whole ‘PC elitism’ thing. If you want to take the entirely reasonable position that both franchises deserve about as much respect as a turd in the gutter, that’s fine. Or if you want to champion Battlefield because, y’know, you actually think those titles are better games or their design principles otherwise hold greater appeal for you, that’s cool too. But this whole “let’s knock CoD for churning out the same shit over and over again like clockwork” thing is stupid. Anyone not blinded by fanboyism would list both franchises as amongst the most whored out in gaming, right up there with EA Sports and The Sims.

    • mpk says:

      Godwin’s Law is still alive and well, eh?

    • Eukatheude says:

      @Rii
      Really, please stop using ad hominem arguments. It’s annoying and pointless.
      Anyway. I’m not a fanboy of any of these games – i sort of like them both – and i recognise they’re both just milking cows for their publisher… But please, don’t you feel it’s ridiculous to imply there’s the same amount of work behind them? Just look at all the new stuff they put in their games. Compare MW>MW2 to BF2>BFBC2.

    • mejoff says:

      @ Spider Jerusalem
      “Meanwhile, the Battlefield series has blown through locales, time and advanced the engine significantly.”

      Either you get to include the early COD games to make up the list, or you get to claim that BF has covered more ground.

      As a fan of both series I can safely say that they both cover large numbers of locales, and each cover three rough time-periods, and it’s not IW’s fault that BF1942 didn’t look as good as COD1, and thus had more room for engine advancement.

    • 0p8 says:

      @torchedEARTH…..“Thank goodness for COD games!

      Just let that sink in a moment. Now, what I mean is, all the people who can play the same pap year after year won’t be clogging up the BF3 servers.”

      i think you may be dissapointed mate.
      for more than just the reason you have stated.

      saying that,personally i’ll be playing both.

  13. Thants says:

    I gotta say, the Spec Ops mode in MW2 was a lot of fun.

    • Baka says:

      Yes, I was afraid to be alone with my positive feedback in this comment section. MW2 Spec Ops was one of the best co-op experiences I’ve ever had, hands down. A pity that they’re going the survival wave route with the third…

    • SpoiledToast says:

      I’ve spent so many hours playing spec-ops. This looks really good to me, but I hope there will be some other modes than survival.

  14. ZamFear says:

    Are Imperial minutes longer or shorter than metric minutes?

  15. AlwaysRight says:

    YEY!!! SPLOSIONS!!! Boom! Ratatatata! Brap Pop Bang!

  16. McDan says:

    Looks…uninspired, pretty much like some levels on spec ops on MW2, but I’ll end up playing it anyway because I like this kind of gameplay.

  17. povu says:

    BLOODY SCREEN! SO REAL!

  18. lijenstina says:

    Only three USA flags on the uniform ?!
    This is an outrage.

  19. Lagwolf says:

    So will the solo game be 90 mins this time or are they bothering at all?

    • jay35 says:

      I wish they wouldn’t bother at all. Linear cut-scene-filled whack-a-mole with excessive colorful metaphors got old about two CoDs ago. Considering how much of their budget is wasted on singleplayer, they really should stop bothering with it and just put that money into making multiplayer awesome. They COULD, they just refuse to. They’d rather make a tacky, forced singleplayer experience and a half-assed, consolized multiplayer experience.

  20. Sicram says:

    Now where have I seen almost the EXACT same thing before? HMM… While spec ops in MW2 seemed to be fun at first I have only gotten major lagg when playing it with friends.

    This video really shows how the MW series feels; without mass, hyperactive and shallow. They recycle so much it’s insane. While I do agree that one should not break that’s not broken but at least TRY to make it look more fresh, geez.

  21. Teddy Leach says:

    The multiplayer, just like COD 4, will probably be fine. Why don’t they start making multiplayer only games? It’ll make me feel better.

    Answer: They won’t make as much money off it.

  22. slick_101 says:

    Okay guys Enough of the Elitism. They have found a formula that works a treat. Minimum effort maximum profit. I actually congratulate them. They have made a money making machine. I admit I REALLY hate how its the same. But the majority of people don’t.

    But anyway, if your not going to buy them game we don’t need you plastering all over the place that this is a crap game. If it was such a crap game why don’t you make and sell a game that’s half as popular.

  23. Luringen says:

    If Call of Duty is a franchise, can we say that Modern Warfare is a sub-franchise? Hmmm…
    Also: survival as a game mode is neat, but that’s not enough new stuff to justify buying it.

  24. GenBanks says:

    Every single trailer of everything seems to use the Inception Braaawww Braaaaaw sound. Battlefield 3, this MW3 thing, Discovery channel shows…

  25. westyfield says:

    DOGBOMBS AND BOMBDOGS.

    • Man Raised by Puffins says:

      I feel thoroughly ashamed that I didn’t immediately make this connection.

    • Vandelay says:

      “Enemy attack dogs near your position. Be advised, they are carrying explosives.”

      I’m kind of amazed this isn’t the main talking point of the above article and it has gone unmentioned in the comments. I mean, people keep asking for CoD to try and do something new with each iteration, but this has dogs carrying explosives! What more could you need?

  26. misterdoo01 says:

    Despite looking exactly like Modern Warfare 2, that looks like a lot of fun, certainly more so than Nazi Zombies. Hell, if MW3 runs as well as MW2 did on my computer I could see myself getting this at some poi-

    Whoops, I forgot, I’m a PC gamer and therefor not allowed to like Call of Duty and have to suck Battlefield 3′s cock.

    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

  27. pupsikaso says:

    Did I miss something? Why is there a post about a console game on RPS?

  28. BrightCandle says:

    Its modern warfare, I am not expecting miracle changes. I for one will probably buy it at some point, not because I think its a great game but because its going to improve a little on the previous generation and I like COD. Of them all I’ve enjoyed 1 and 4 the most. I like the single player missions and if the multiplayer turns out to be good then that is nice, but based on MW2 and BO I suspect it wont be anything new.

    • 0p8 says:

      i think CoD2 has the best SP campaign of all time. (In the FPS category ofc)

    • Nalano says:

      Was it CoD or CoD2 that made you do the “first man gets the rifle, second man gets the bullets,” scene lifted from Enemy at the Gates? I think that one was the best.

    • 0p8 says:

      In the russian segments of the campaign, Cod2 was very similar in parts to enemy at the gates, you even have the same (or similar?) name to the guy in the movie, cant be bothered to wiki but i’m sure its private vasili?

  29. rocketman71 says:

    No. Just no.

  30. kyrieee says:

    Ironsights! American military voices! I’m sold

  31. ragingjambo says:

    More COD news, more Angry Internet Men to protest against it’s success. I’m sure this game will be the highest selling title of 2011, despite being released in November, it’ll also score 85+ on Metacritic.

    I thought the trailer looked great! (as does the rest of the footage released). I don’t think there will be much else on the PC that will be able to do similar things to the spec ops mode and I imagine it will be a tonne of fun in online co op, this and Deus Ex are shaping up to be my most anticipated of 2011.

  32. SpoiledToast says:

    Could we please stop the “All Call of Duty players are retards” thing going on here? I find it insulting, and it’s a silly thing to say. I enjoy Call of Duty and I’m pretty sure I’m not stupid.

    Thanks!

  33. Snuffy the Evil says:

    So, it’s like the Zombies gamemode, but without the zombies?

  34. sasbean says:

    Seriously people just calm down. The graphics have been changed but not by much because this is as much as the consoles can handle.
    Also, can we please stop the arguing about battlefield vs cod. They are two different games for two different audiences, and no, neither or the player bases are regards for their choice of game. Cod is simple and accessible and that is good is why it sells so well, infinity ward does also make big changes, there is a massive difference between mw1 and mw2, treyarch isn’t so good imo.
    Battlefield however is for different people, ones who like what battlefield offers.
    I play a lot of cod mw1 and mw2 but I have played bfbc2 and they are both good. So can everyone stop having an argument about which is better, it is an opinion and do no one is wrong.
    One final point, if you don’t like a game then don’t read about it just so you can complain because you don’t like it.

  35. jay35 says:

    Time for more $15 map packs! WOOHOOO

  36. ShineDog says:

    It’s amazing me how the terrible, terrible sound effects can fly. I quite like CoD, for the record, (Although my heart is with BF. 2142 when it had players was basically my favourite shooter) but good god, guns go “fft” – hostiles weapons sound silenced past about 20 meters. It’s really kinda bad.

    I was really hoping they would have done something about this for 3, but apparently not.

  37. squareking says:

    I shoot the mens and they fall down.

  38. Buttless Boy says:

    Wait, there’s a Duty Calls sequel? Awesome!

  39. Skaaltel 79 says:

    Win or lose, argue on the internet and you’re a loser. =D

    Every call of duty game since the first has been the same game with new singleplayer scenarios blatantly stolen from popular movies/shows/games. I have still played every single one and enjoyed them immensely. I don’t play them online. Not my style!

    Battlefield was an amazing huge-world multiplayer experience. Desert Combat (mod for 1942) was my fave. Every game since then has been shrinking the maps. The bad company games added an engaging if somewhat A.D.D. singleplayer storyline.

    Both games are fun. I’m looking forward to both. I’ve also played games on a 360, ps3 and my PC. I know I’m not alone. so Yay!

  40. gwathdring says:

    BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAUUUUUUUUUUNGGG.

    -sigh-

  41. Rii says:

    reply fail

  42. Bobic says:

    I know it’s not indie or 2d or a sidescroller or “an experiment in narrative orthodoxy”, but unlike you guys, I can enjoy a game even if it is popular.

  43. Dusk says:

    11/08/11

    BUT THAT’S TOMORROW!!!!

  44. Davie says:

    Shoot shoot military lingo gun helicopter explosion desert shoot gun ironsights green text same goddamn game.

  45. Gabe McGrath says:

    I’ve never played any of these games, but no… I don’t feel ‘superior’ to those who do.

    I just want to say…
    I just can’t *stand* the “+150″ things that keep appearing in the middle of the screen.

    Because
    (a) They yell “!!! VIDEOGAME !!!” at you and break immersion
    (b) They’re an unnecessary feedback mechanism; you can TELL if someone dies FFS.
    (c) They’re an unneeded “pat on the head”. Again, you can TELL if you’re doing well in the game.

    • gwathdring says:

      Yeah, and I’m sure there’s a sub-menu to check scores/XP. I usually turn those numbers off in RPGs and MMOs where they actually make more sense given the mechanics. I find them extremely annoying.

      Also I’m in the same boat as your first sentence too. :) But I understand the frustration with how little the series evolves from people who are fans of this or that game from the series.

  46. uberserge says:

    I think CoD is just another Tony Hawk. They do very little with what they have as well. The mechanics are always the same, the fundamental never change, and the variables in which you must consider to strategically thrive over your opponents are downright sloppy. Halo make you think on your feet, makes you plan an predict what your opponent might do in real time; none of this “Hey i saw you first and now you’re dead BULLSHIT.” You can come back from an opponent who has you at health in some very well planned out way ,while using many variables in the game that can effect the outcome, but in CoD you just shoot.

    • gwathdring says:

      I haven’t played call of duty, and I’ve never owned a Halo game. But I have played both Halo 1 and Halo 2 at various lan parties, and I don’t really remember any more tactical gameplay in that than in any other deathmatch/ctf shooter. It felt pretty straightforward to me. Shoot, don’t get shot.There were some vehicles and power-ups, but that was all that made it feel different to me. Counter-Strike LAN parties always felt a lot more tactical than any other death-match style game I’ve played. Objective based games tend to be a little more tactical by nature, though. Also really competitive play in any game tends to get tactical by nature as well.

    • Marcem says:

      I don’t think the problem was that, I think it was that they changed too much. The game just doesn’t feel right in something like Project 8 compared to THPS 2 or 3.

  47. akumen says:

    A zombie survival mode …. without the zombies? Magical! Must buy … not.

    Animations and character models look exactly the same as previous instalments.

  48. The Colonel says:

    Oooooh. Is this a sequel to Commandos: Beyond the Call of Duty!? I’ve been looking forward to this for years! I hope it’s gone back to be beautiful hi-res 2D renders. EXCITED!!!!

  49. CalleX says:

    GOD MODE ACTIVATE!!

  50. lucasdigital says:

    RPS frequently posts about games I have no interest in, follow-ons and expansions to games I didn’t enjoy. Clearly, I don’t waste my time leaving comments, I go and look for stuff I like the look of or have some interest in.

    I’ll never understand all you guys who feel obligated to go out of your way to scorn MW1 or MW2. Mainstream success may, indeed, be a poor gauge of quality, but it does not follow that a game that makes waves beyond the gaming community must some how be contaminated.

    This looks like an interesting new game mode, the maps look varied and interesting – and if the game look more like an expansion than a fully fledged new game – maybe that’s because that’s effectively what it is – albeit one that is produced on a hollywood scale budget..

Comment on this story

XHTML: Allowed code: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>