Call of Duty - Modern Warfare 3 (2023)

[Lurch 1,620]

Looks like the Call of Modern for this year will be releasing on the 10th of November 2023 and will have its own large scale Warzone which will launch in December.

 

The game will be developed by Sledgehammer Games.

[slamminbones 1,809]

Will be interesting what game it'll be but my guess most likely it'll either be a new game or a follow from that world war piece of shit they did.

[techno 3,511]

On 5/12/2023 at 10:41 PM, slamminbones said:

Will be interesting what game it'll be but my guess most likely it'll either be a new game or a follow from that world war piece of shit they did.

Ww2 ? That will be sledgehammers best effort. This next game is more than likely to be a steaming heap. Is anybody really hyped ?

[Lurch 1,620]

56 minutes ago, techno said:

Ww2 ? That will be sledgehammers best effort. This next game is more than likely to be a steaming heap. Is anybody really hyped ?

 

Will try to stay optimistic 👍

[slamminbones 1,809]

1 hour ago, techno said:

Ww2 ? That will be sledgehammers best effort. This next game is more than likely to be a steaming heap. Is anybody really hyped ?

It's a cod game so will be getting even if it is shite.

[J4MES OX4D 10,060]

On 5/12/2023 at 10:41 PM, slamminbones said:

Will be interesting what game it'll be but my guess most likely it'll either be a new game or a follow from that world war piece of shit they did.

It's almost certainly to be a follow-on to MW2 based on the official sources gathered over the past 6 months. The only debate is whether it's gonna be a DLC like originally intended, a standalone spin-off, or Modern Warfare 3. It honestly wouldn't surprise me if they still haven't decided this yet.  I can't see it being presented as DLC or an expansion though because of the state MW2 is currently in. A spin-off could be a nice alternative especially under new developers but it may be seen as a weak move for driving sales. MW3 it may turn out to be if Activision just want to wind up and conclude the trilogy early rather have yet another IW effort released within the next two years. 

 

I'm really not holding out much hope but still interested to see what SHG do as they always try their best despite being heavily under-resourced compared to the other studios and having huge personnel turnover. I'm not hyped in the slightest though and if someone said to me you can never play another COD game ever, I would not give a toss. 

[GazzaGarratt 11,066]

Strange as I'm still having heaps of fun on the existing MW2 game right now. It would be nice to see this last a little longer but could understand how it may burn out just in time for MW3 at Xmas time.

[cyberninja2601 1,106]

 

Just give me some more DMZ stuff and I'll be happy. I just play MP when new guns come out in order to unlock then I go back in the DMZ. 

 

It's an outstanding mode. Unfortunately it does not seem to resonate with this group. The new mid-season is tons of fun. It's really a mini raid. Building 21 and the other 2 maps are great. 

 

A lot of people have complained about P2W.  The only thing I would say is a true advantage is the 15 minutes weapon cool down with two of the best weapons for the mode. 

[Tove 488]

I’m secretly hoping there is some kind of progression between mw2 and mw3. Not holding my breath though,

 

I’m kinda burnt out on dmz at the moment and am not really playing that much anymore. 
 

I’ll be honest though I have bought a couple of the bundles, having a taq-56 and mcpr-300 with 15 minute cool-down is a blessing it means with 3 insured slots I can even take an insured gun in for regear runs. It’s not so much pay to win for me as I still lose a lot it’s more like pay to play.

[Greboth 2,721]

Well see what it brings, I quite liked that Cold War and Vanguard gave MW2019 a 3 year life cycle until MW2(022) replaced it.  So a MW3 expansion would be nice to extend MW2 rather than a whole new game.  But we know it'll probably be a full priced new game with less content so James will have lots to moan about 😄 

[MrBiron 1,460]

I'm still disappointed that this is going to be a whole new game rather than the expansion to MW2 that it was originally rumoured to be.

I also fully expect this to be an unfinished mess. No beta* until October. The reveal is supposedly not coming until August.

💩

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*playable demo.

[GazzaGarratt 11,066]

On 5/15/2023 at 2:54 PM, cyberninja2601 said:

It's an outstanding mode. Unfortunately it does not seem to resonate with this group. The new mid-season is tons of fun. It's really a mini raid. Building 21 and the other 2 maps are great. 

 

I'd agree that it is a very good mode that not as many people here play but I think alot of that has to do with the max party size of 3 if I'm honest. I go and play it sometimes when i jump online and only 2 or 3 jump straight into a party....but 2 mins later we usually hit 4 or more players so MP then is the way to go.

 

Considering they allow 6 players to group together when you are on the map itself, it would be nice to see if they could allow a mode with larger squads. It would open up possibilities for more players to jump into together when theres 4-6 around. I'm sure they'll build on it more so because they've built it into the F2P side of things too.

[MrBiron 1,460]

Leaks and rumours. 

Also the official COD twitter account put a tweet out asking if CHARACTERS, bundles and weapons from MW2 should carry over to this years COD. 

So it looks like that will happen. 

 

 

[crippled_viper 258]

Hmmmm....interesting.

[MrBiron 1,460]

Activision released the shittest ever reveal trailer for this game which just gave a release date (November 10th). The trailer is so shit and pointless that I can't even be arsed putting a link in here.

[J4MES OX4D 10,060]

I think a lot will depend on them getting the movement right - MW2019 was slick and people really enjoyed it. Playing that at 150fps+ was incredibly satisfying even though the game had its issues. MWII took away all the fluidity along with slide/reload cancel and it was sluggish in comparison especially with how clunky Warzone felt. This could be the determining and major differentiating factor. 

 

1 hour ago, MrBiron said:

Activision released the shittest ever reveal trailer for this game which just gave a release date (November 10th). The trailer is so shit and pointless that I can't even be arsed putting a link in here.

Just seen it. Doesn't generate any excitement really. Franchise is feeling really tired now. 

[Greboth 2,721]

Maybe it's just my old eyes but can't say I particularly noticed a difference in movement between MW-2019 and MW2-022.

 

If characters, guns etc. all carry over to MW3, I wonder if Activision will go a Destiny style route with CoD.  I know the games are so vastly different but rather than a 'new' CoD each year, why not do it as a huge DLC pack that adds on to the existing game.

[J4MES OX4D 10,060]

1 hour ago, Greboth said:

I know the games are so vastly different but rather than a 'new' CoD each year, why not do it as a huge DLC pack that adds on to the existing game.

Because the existing games are usually on their last legs long before then and then further demanding people buy an expansion for a game they don't play at full price wouldn't see many people coming back especially at a premium. Would also start splitting the playerbase and leave departed players alienated and possibly not coming back. MW3 is an isolated case because Activision did not plan ahead adequately and I wouldn't expect them to repeat this again. If they wanted to do down this avenue, it should've been done years ago and done properly, however the series was too busy pissing around with boost jumping, wall running and going back to World War 2.  I don't believe they've made a game that offers a confident foundation for them to build upon either but MW2019 would've been a good starting point and then they go and follow it up with a highly inferior game. 

 

It's definitely possible for this to happen - Siege, Fortnite, Apex and CS maintain strong playerbases and even grow still to this day but COD always struggles with this respect and until they produce a game that has lasting potential and a cemented design, then they will forever be releasing annually rinse and repeat. If only they released COD Online worldwide and supported that...

[phil bottle 9,824]

I hear Microsoft have opened servers for all the old 360 era COD games. OG MW3 was the last COD I properly enjoyed funnily enough.

[J4MES OX4D 10,060]

2 hours ago, phil bottle said:

I hear Microsoft have opened servers for all the old 360 era COD games. OG MW3 was the last COD I properly enjoyed funnily enough.

Yep, they renewed the IWNet framework allowing for P2P matchmaking however users are already reporting accounts being wiped and massive security problems because although they fixed the matchmaking, they did fuck all to eradicate the modders, cheaters and malicious actors. I’d actually avoid it just like the high-risk PC versions. 

[Greboth 2,721]

15 hours ago, J4MES OX4D said:

Because the existing games are usually on their last legs long before then and then further demanding people buy an expansion for a game they don't play at full price wouldn't see many people coming back especially at a premium. Would also start splitting the playerbase and leave departed players alienated and possibly not coming back. MW3 is an isolated case because Activision did not plan ahead adequately and I wouldn't expect them to repeat this again. If they wanted to do down this avenue, it should've been done years ago and done properly, however the series was too busy pissing around with boost jumping, wall running and going back to World War 2.  I don't believe they've made a game that offers a confident foundation for them to build upon either but MW2019 would've been a good starting point and then they go and follow it up with a highly inferior game. 

 

It's definitely possible for this to happen - Siege, Fortnite, Apex and CS maintain strong playerbases and even grow still to this day but COD always struggles with this respect and until they produce a game that has lasting potential and a cemented design, then they will forever be releasing annually rinse and repeat. If only they released COD Online worldwide and supported that...

 

You don't think Destiny sees a significant drop off in players over a season and then a peak when new DLC is released?  The problems you mention though do impact games such as Destiny too, how many players don't return due to the amount of content passed.  Though Destiny somewhat get round this by giving older content for free or bundled in to newer DLC.  Sticking to the Destiny comparison though, I don't think CoD need to release a game that has lasting potential and a cemented design - Destiny 1 was good but there was also a lot of problems with it, one similar to recent CoD was content.  But the sticking power of Destiny has been down to Bungie adding content as well as tweaking and changing movement and mechanics over time to improve things.  MW2(022) suffered from lack of content and there's a few issues that people really hate, like slide cancelling, but the core game is fine IMO to build on.  Not to mention, CoD players drop off over the year but peaks again with the release of a 'new' CoD.  If they release a DLC pack with as much content as a full game, I don't think it's unreasonable to think a similar number of players would return.

 

If MW3 does basically end up being DLC for MW2(022) then it will be an interesting experiment to see how well it does.

[J4MES OX4D 10,060]

1 hour ago, Greboth said:

 

You don't think Destiny sees a significant drop off in players over a season and then a peak when new DLC is released?  The problems you mention though do impact games such as Destiny too, how many players don't return due to the amount of content passed.  Though Destiny somewhat get round this by giving older content for free or bundled in to newer DLC.  Sticking to the Destiny comparison though, I don't think CoD need to release a game that has lasting potential and a cemented design - Destiny 1 was good but there was also a lot of problems with it, one similar to recent CoD was content.  But the sticking power of Destiny has been down to Bungie adding content as well as tweaking and changing movement and mechanics over time to improve things.  MW2(022) suffered from lack of content and there's a few issues that people really hate, like slide cancelling, but the core game is fine IMO to build on.  Not to mention, CoD players drop off over the year but peaks again with the release of a 'new' CoD.  If they release a DLC pack with as much content as a full game, I don't think it's unreasonable to think a similar number of players would return.

 

If MW3 does basically end up being DLC for MW2(022) then it will be an interesting experiment to see how well it does.

And look at the dire state Destiny 2 is in right now - they couldn't even survive one premium release after going independent without having to seek an external buyout and even with a major backer, they have brick-walled themselves. Their last expansion sold abysmally and currently has a mostly negative rating on Steam. Call of Duty cannot afford to ever put itself in a position especially if they want to keep the brand alive. Destiny 2 is all but dead in the water now because this model has failed to bring players back and grow the game even being free. 

 

If COD is ever going to adopt a model of the same game every year being expanded upon then they actually have to make a solid foundation and make players stick and this is something they have failed to do since 2013 which is why it would be very risky.  Activision rely on the day one sales and the early buzz before the player counts drop off significantly and then they milk the remainders. A persistent model cannot afford any drop-offs and demonstrate growth and once again this is something Call of Duty has failed to do for a decade unlike its competitors.

 

The franchise is probably too stale and it being far too late in the day to explore something like this.  What keeps COD fresh is it being a new game so if you take that away then you have to persuade existing owners to pay a premium to come back and also produce something that offers growth potential and I'm not sure if COD will limit itself if it just turns into a one-brand band. 

 

The one thing they should've kept persistent is Warzone and they royally fucked that up by removing Verdansk, pulling people's purchases and replacing the engine. That was Activision's opportunity to prove the concept of an ongoing concern and they completely ruined it for everyone. 

[Greboth 2,721]

22 hours ago, J4MES OX4D said:

Their last expansion sold abysmally and currently has a mostly negative rating on Steam. Call of Duty cannot afford to ever put itself in a position especially if they want to keep the brand alive. Destiny 2 is all but dead in the water now because this model has failed to bring players back and grow the game even being free. 

 

No, Destiny 2 is all but dead in the water as Lightfall is shit expansion that neither critics or fans like.  However The Witch Queen reviewed well by the media and players and as a consequence did well.  Which you can't attribute to the model being bad, even if they released the DLC as new games, if Destiny 7 Lightfall did badly the series would be on it's knees too.

 

22 hours ago, J4MES OX4D said:

The franchise is probably too stale and it being far too late in the day to explore something like this.  What keeps COD fresh is it being a new game so if you take that away then you have to persuade existing owners to pay a premium to come back

 

I'd agree the franchise is too stale but that's also an argument for trying something different like a continuous game to revitalise it.  There's a mountain of problems with the servers of the old COD's coming back online.  But you only have to look online to see peoples interest in playing the old CoD's.  Now imagine, you could play those old CoD's 

 

You mean the "fresh" COD you've spent how many posts moaning about having so little content and new content just being rehashed old content?  You do also realise that when MW3 comes out, MW2 players will have to pay to come back too?

 

I'm not saying it will work if they go this route, it probably won't.  But an annual release of CoD has a lot of the same problems of a continuous game with DLC's.

 

[GazzaGarratt 11,066]

I would've preferred it to be a DLC ontop of MW2 due to how solid this last game has been. But businesses need to make money and I think they struggle to understand how to make a regular incremental expanding game in the CoD experience. I think their work on Warzone, to DMZ to Raids has actually been a really good progression but doesn't see much positive news because it has an opposite player base to something like Destiny, which is mostly PvE. CoD has far more PvP players so we have to remember that with PvP games it is very hard to add regular content that could make it really enticing to keep on it. Having said that, give PvP players a game which feels balanced, fun and lots of gun/gamemodes to play and they'll just play it for eternity.

 

Give it 4-5 years we may see the CoD ecosystem move towards the base F2P as it is now, enhance it, and then these additional campaigns with some PvP wrapped up in it become seasonal paid upgrades.

[MrBiron 1,460]

 

Info about MP.

Essentially Sledgehammer have just brought back or removed shit that players hated about MW2. So we have a normal mini map, a quite footstep perk and some other things. Plus at launch we'll get all of the original MW2 launch maps. Which sounds good but could end up being bad as modern COD play differently now.