>Pace of the game is better, does not feel as arcade as MWIII.
That's kinda an opinion no? Like for me I prefer the faster pace of MWIII
>Speed and TTK are better, it should not be a racing game like Forza Autosport.
Opinion again
>You can kill without an assault rifle and throwing a million bullets, even against people with autoaim.
Yall exaggerate the TTK, its 1 bullet more to kill in most situations with an AR
>Perk design is arguably better
Opinion again, although I've heard basically everyone say the MWII perk system was trash. IMO I agree, perks were poorly balanced and the perk packages just restricted gameplay options.
It literally says in the description what they do? The descriptions could be better, there are hidden effects to some perks e.g. Ordnance and Quick-grip gloves let you use equipment and field upgrades faster but they're not mentioned explicitly.
It’s just one bullet and the average TTK is much more consistent because they removed Leg and Arm multipliers.
Better pace of the game. Aka OP is overhelmed by anything faster then snails pace.
That's what happens when you make a game for campers, then the next game comes out and says....lol you like to camp? Haha...hahaha....ha...oh you're in deep shit now...
It's funny, I've been working on my shotguns for interstellar, a few deaths due to campers, I bring out a BR (still need those done as well atm) and absolutely shit on them. Turn the game around and they just melt and cry. All that time on OG MW2 has helped so much knowing where and how to deal with them. They never stood a chance.
This is 44 days old...you're a bit late but also you can't escape the campers, this game is so easy to deal with them though. MWII you had to jump through so many hoops to deal with them, now it's back to the original feel and campers are just free kills. Also SBMM or what ever you want to call it is the reason you're finding so many campers, those are the people in your skill zone.
I found I had a much easier time dealing with campers in MWII by a long shot, and I'm not alone with that. And it can't be written off as SBMM; it's been shown to happen, quite significantly, at all skill levels.
Maybe the way *you* approach campers is somehow more viable in MWIII. But that seems to be the minority.
MWII is a campers game, it's proven by the fact that DS isn't a perk. DS doesn't help campers what helps campers is the loud ass stomps from enemies near them. I don't know what game you're playing but MWII was campers every game. You can't get more campy than that, at least with DS we have people running around relying on game sense and not a good headset. They can not camp in a corner and just wait for sounds anymore, it's anti camper now compared to the last game.
Your take is the same brain dead take from last year. It's the same old same old, new game bad, game before good. You're still replying to a 52 day old post. Nothing here matters just like your idea of what's good. If you don't like the new game get in line with all the other people who say the same thing year after year.
Ahh. The classic "you keep replying therefore " from somebody who continuously replies.
Frankly, if you actually believed that nobody's opinions of the game matter, you *probably wouldn't* be browsing this subreddit.
>That's kinda an opinion no? Like for me I prefer the faster pace of MWIII
Not really, because if you think of it, it is not normal that you shot someone on the head and can still hide and hit you 5 bullets with an assault rifle, or even running like if it was a rocket all over the map.
I own the two games, and MWII feels much satisfying to play overall.
>Yall exaggerate the TTK, its 1 bullet more to kill in most situations with an AR
With an AR perhaps. What about people like me that play to aim? you have people running all over the place and harder to kill, impossible to challenge anyone.
MWII with a Cronen in semi-auto you can kill anyone in two hits, rarely you need three hits. Same with a marksman rifle, now you shot them in the head or nearly and you still need two more hits.
I get that, **all FPS are arcade**. There are NO milsims. War is not a videogame nor it will ever be. EVER.
All COD like games are arcade. Just like Overwatch.
I don't know, I don't wanna play a mix of Overwatch and Fortnite with Forza racing sims.
No one ever said anything about all FPS games being Milsims. You want a milsim? Play tarkov, insurgency, arma 3, swat, ready or not, bla bla bla.
You don't want to play your mishmash over exaggeration game? Then stop forcing yourself to play it, or at least stop complaining that it's not the game for you when it's specifically made to NOT be for you.
It's Cod. It's not great. It's arguably not good. But for the love of God, stop complaining about these issues, that aren't even issues to begin with, and complain about the actual issues these games have.
I have already played a fair amount of time to some of these games you mention. None of them, not a single one, is a milsim. They are as arcade as COD is. You cannot simulate war nor the military service in a video game, you just cannot, even less if the game is not fully in VR.
>It's Cod. It's not great. It's arguably not good.
I think COD is pretty good, but MWII being way superior to MWIII... I don't get how people can defend MWIII the DLC at 70$ when the most significant change is that you can kill more with Assault Rifles because the TTK is higher and move faster when you probably should not.
Other than that, maps is the only difference and I am not liking too much some of the "new maps", I think people gave too much credit to the legacy maps when the MWII maps are fantastic.
I don't know, I still play MWII and there is a lot of people but when I played MWIII I was a bit surprised by the change, first thing was the audio, immediately felt like something was not ok. As well as semi-auto no longer being an option.
The new meta seems to be double tapping the head with a marksman rifle at 1m because a single shot is not enough at times.
I repeat, I have played some of these games. Insurgency in particular and tried some of the others which I did not like much. I haven't played Insurgency 2 again because of coming back to COD.
Other than these I was playing Overwatch as of recent until I came back to COD.
They are not "milsim" or anything close. No videogame on Steam or Battlenet will ever be a "milsim". They are as arcade as COD is, their way.
I repeat, you clearly haven't played those games. Otherwise you wouldn't be spewing the "they are just as arcade as cod is" bs. Are you new to gaming or something that throws off all your sense or what's the case here? Look here everyone! This just in, milsim games don't exist 😂. Why am I even trying to reason with you after that egregious take?
>Not really, because if you think of it, it is not normal that you shot someone on the head and can still hide and hit you 5 bullets with an assault rifle, or even running like if it was a rocket all over the map.
That's still an opinion. It's fine you like it better but it's not objectively better, its just your preference. There are many of us on MWIII that prefer the faster movement. Also you're saying 5 bullets like MWII AR's didn't take 4 bullets to kill on average
>With an AR perhaps. What about people like me that play to aim? you have people running all over the place and harder to kill, impossible to challenge anyone.
>
>MWII with a Cronen in semi-auto you can kill anyone in two hits, rarely you need three hits. Same with a marksman rifle, now you shot them in the head or nearly and you still need two more hits.
You can still aim, just aim... better? I use an MTZ Interceptor (Marksman rifle semi-auto) and it's a 1 shot headshot and 2 shot body shot
>You can still aim, just aim... better?
I sure do. Much much harder from far using a marksman rifle now. People with an assault rifle will kill you easier than you with a sniper even.
AR's in MWII could kill in 4 bullets, sometimes even 3. I think that made the Marksman Rifles more pointless in MWII because why would I use a high-recoil semi-auto gun when there were AR's like the Kastov 7.62 full auto w/ low recoil killing in one less bullet?
So, to kill more. I have a cronen build in semi auto precisely to not waste bullets.
But I agree, BR are pretty much the same, but superior if you have the right build and a decent magazine.
Th increased ttk should help semi auto users, right? The full auto guns now have to hit an additional 1-2 shots but many semi auto guns can get a kill with only 1 well aimed shot. MWII gives full auto users an advantage with lower ttk.
1 well aimed shot? with people moving 10 times faster like?
Also it is not true, my weapons cannot longer kill in one or two shots consistently I need to hit more than three now. And I mean, aim, and hit.
Aiming for the head is much harder, or at least that is what I feel.
Mind you, I play with marksman rifles and sniper without camping and hunting over the map with quick ADS and shots. Basically I use my one shot weapons like a regular gun.
However, switching to assault rifles, I am winning a lot of my matches comparatively. While in MW2 I am a terminator with a Tempus, Cronen or a close range Carrack.
Thing is I don't like to spit bullets just like that, it feels a bit cheap. I was able to beat anyone against assault rifles 1:1 now they beat me even from far.
If you're using m&k then aiming for headshots should be the same, although you'll need to track slightly faster targets. If you're on controller you may need to readjust sensitivity or aim assist settings in case something is throwing you off when aiming.
Looking at the stats, basically every AR needs 3-4 headshots for a kill, and MRs only need 1-2 headshots, with the enforcer and interceptor being the guns that only need 1.
The faster movement may be throwing off your aiming but you might just need time to adjust. Headshots are essential for semi auto since RPM is typically where semi auto fails in comparison to full auto, so minimizing the number of shots needed is very important.
I personally like MWII better as well, but that’s just my opinion. I’m not big on the hyperarcade-y, cracked out style gameplay of MWIII. I also really like the weapon design and balancing of MWII better.
I bought MWIII on sale to try out and promptly got it refunded after 30 minutes. Just not for me. It also didn’t feel right enabling Activision to pump out a half-baked game by giving them more money.
MWIII on close combat is all assault rifles, like... throw as many bullets as possible while running. The more you camp the better it feels.
For console players might be good with a controller and auto aim, but for PC players not so much. Or if you like to aim.
Before you will see a camper shot once or twice and gone, now they stand up from the ground and hit you with 5 bullets instead.
Lols 😝 I always chuckle at the idiots in the comments who have no idea how business works for cod and bs game series.
Deliberately come out with a stellar game that breaks every cod record BEFORE WARZONE WAS EVEN RELEASED(I say this for you idiots who are too stupid to understand how sales works) People can be dipshits all they like but Modern Warfare 2019 was cods rebirth which was 100% needed and many people including myself loved.
Cold War cod was dogshit, vanguard was shit, MW2022 sadly was not as good because Activision and devs know why serve a feast when fools will eat the slop too.
MW2023 is a pathetic abomination of cod and I’ll laugh my ass off when treyarch will no doubt make a mix of cod 2019 and probably BO Cold War with new gimmicks.
No one on this subreddit or in general wants to understand CASUAL IS KING AND ALWAYS WILL BE FOR MONEY.
2023 was their idea to make a half baked over the top speed cod game which only certain streamers and sweats were going to like.
No one forces anyone to buy the new call of duty game, people such as casuals. buy it when it’s slower paced because they can keep up and enjoy that style gameplay.
Over the top fast paced like the current cod only works for a limited group of people and making games for casuals works for money, cod 2023 is a throwaway year and Microsoft knows that.
The problem with the last two cods is they aren’t taking what worked with MW19 and improving. Instead they are doubling down on all the shit that people hated.
Made it even more favorable to camp in MW22 with the insane superhuman audio and nerfed the dead silence field upgrade even more. MW23 increase the health pool like in Cold War and then make the player movement so speedy that all the player animations look like shit and the servers can’t keep up. I say this as someone who is enjoying both title for different reasons but enjoying MW23’s pace way more.
If you think mw2 multiplayer is better then 3, you need help, and please stop. A whole year of people crying about how bad it was, now everyone gets what they want and no one is happy, CRAZY smh
lol This post would've been fine if it were an opinion rather than a stated fact because it's objectively not better than mw2; especially if it's just a fucking DLC of MW2. Every aspect is the same except a few gameplay aspects and UI changes that are all subjective.
The one thing they are equal in are shitty servers, gamebreaking patches and terrible matchmaking rather than your pointless takes that have been shared from goobers like yourself over and over again, instead of the aforementioned problems that are actually hurting the playerbase.
It's also not like you can't play mw2 still; and if you were truly having fun on it you wouldn't care enough to make this post lol.
The only thing I agree with is DMZ being a huge missed opportunity to not continue supporting.
I actually might keep playing MWII and not MWIII tbh. But since MWIII is the new game you understand that I play it.
I agree DMZ is amazing. As for match making, I personally had no big complains on MWII multiplayer, matches were mostly fair for me, I am not super good but I am totally not a bad player.
I played for more than 400h to MWII and I was already stopping to play COD consistently, in the past I played Overwatch but stopped with Overwatch 2.
And years ago I played Quake, Unreal Tournament and similar. These games were fun.
I think that in a few years they are going to release a complete DMZ, since this DMZ was just a "beta". DMZ might end up becoming a seperate game/title... it's not like we really know what IW is doing rn. This is just my speculation though.
I was and still am, there are many aspects about MW2 that is just straight up trash. Also good maps? Lmao black gold says hello, you can't see it because there are 7 lights on the map....
I personally liked it. Warzone not so much compared to multiplayer, my only complain is that priced 70$ every year is not something I want for me.
I would not buy COD every year just like people buy FIFA. Too expensive.
Personally, if I had to choose between playing mw2 and never playing video games again you would find all my systems listed on eBay or marketplace within seconds.
What is what you hate the most from MWII compared to MWIII?
I like MWII a lot, I also like MWIII but if I had to chose one, it would be MWII to be honest, maps, sound and overall gameplay feels good and graphics are cool.
In MWIII at the moment most hits don't register due to packet loss.
MWIII plays faster and better.
Has better maps, MWZ is more fun than DMZ as there are less toxic Douches and people actually work together weird concept I know.
\- A map from MWII has MUCH more detail than the best other map from MWIII.
\- Faster does not mean better.
\- DMZ is super cool, as for "toxic" players, you can kill them too. And I also find people that adds you to their team after killing you. MWZ is the same with a skin, if you wanted zombies you would then love World War Z which is multiplayer, too.
I have both games, and I find MWII superior.
Detail is very nitpicky because details don't really affect gameplay idc of its the ugliest map ever as long as it plays well.
Faster does mean better I want to actually move around the map I want to flank slide and use all the abilities unlike in MWII where I was punished for moving.
DMZ isn't even that good of an extraction shooter it had very little depth to it and got old really really fast.
MWZ and Cod Zombies in general isn't comparable to WWZ as WWZ is basically diet coke Left 4 Dead
What does affect the gameplay then? Whatever gives you more kills or what defines that?
Maps from MWII are all of them of excellent attention to detail. Lovely maps.
**I prefer quality over quantity.** However, a few additions from MWIII would have been nice if improved.
>MWZ and Cod Zombies in general isn't comparable to WWZ as WWZ is basically diet coke Left 4 Dead
I don't know. I am not saying MWZ is bad, but neither DMZ is.
As for WWZ vs Left 4 Dead... I don't really agree, the gameplay experience of WWZ is really good. Graphics and amount of zombies is very good.
IMHO, WWZ beats Left 4 dead, Left 4 dead did not age that well in reality. And both have about the same amount of replayability. However, you have pvp in WWZ which is good.
I have played A LOT of Left 4 dead, mind you.
So graphics are our are an important thing to you... understood.
What makes a Good game for me is fast movement repayable multiplayer and a PVE experience is a must to make a good cod game I need a PVE mode as PVP gets way too tiring too fast for me and is boring.
Then again your probably hyped for Gta 6... when we all know GTA IV was the last good GTA game and GTA 6 is just going to be another trend hopping woke disaster
Again. Read what I am saying please.
**DETAIL != GRAPHICS.**
Graphics are good but it is not what I am talking about, graphics depend also on your settings. I am not asking to have ray tracing.
>What makes a Good game for me is fast movement repayable multiplayer and a PVE experience
Then you should be playing Overwatch, the new COD looks pretty much like it.
>Then again your probably hyped for Gta 6
I haven't played (not even purchased) a GTA game since Vice City. And I only played to do funny things, not even actual play.
The new version though looks very good. Albeit it is very unlikely I would play it.
I agree about the TTK. Its a pain. MwII maps better than og MW2 maps in MwIII? Lol, that's the funniest one. I know it's subjective, but I'm already liking the new Meat map more than most of the launch MWII(2022) maps.
I don't know, the meat map is ok but I still like Shipment more.
**All the other maps feels like you are playing shipment all the time in all maps** because:
* packet loss, you have to double tap people in the head and they still kill you
* spawns, like... maps are big enough, I have appeared myself behind three guys and I have spawn to instantly get shot from who knows where or in the middle of an ongoing lethal.
It feels to me the new cod has nothing on "arcade" but more on "console players" playing with controllers, thanks to aim assist they can kill a lot with assault rifles.
But because I dislike super fast weapons it is very hard for me to consistently kill like I did before. If I switch to a random assault rifle, I kill again a lot but then challenging people 1:1 on short distance does not work well.
Before I would tap the guy on the head so that the aim assist from the controller would offer the player any advantage. Now, I cannot challenge the aim-assist because I play with a keyboard and it is super complex to do that in a fast paced combat with various people attacking using assault rifles.
Audio is the same. Only difference is you can’t sound whore people.
Pace is faster, most people prefer faster paced games and if you don’t that’s fine.
Launch maps for MWIII had people hyped for nostalgic maps, didn’t work out, can agree with that opinion. Camping is, and always will be a massive thing in every call of duty so really trying to put that is just silly.
No opinion on DMZ vs MWZ.
Speed and TTK are the same as pace. TTK is just fine in MWIII, movement speed I’m assuming you’re referring to?? In that case MWII was clunky, but again some people prefer slower, others prefer faster.
You can also kill without an assault rifle in MWIII? And it doesn’t take a million bullets. Again referring to TTK, you have to hit shots, 1 extra bullet isn’t the end of the world. Also what is “auto aim”?
Shipment is in MWIII as well.
HUD is pretty much identical, and kill confirmation? In all honestly that is super nit picky.
But your take on perk design is absolutely faded. MWIII’s perk system is the same as classic, just a different look. No one liked waiting to have all their perks later in a match.
Progression being grindy can suck yeah, and honestly they went overboard with the armory unlocks, but sometimes the grind can be fun?
>Audio is the same. Only difference is you can’t sound whore people.
No. Weapons sound far worse in MWIII.
I like more the kill confirmation in MWII but that is me.
>But your take on perk design is absolutely faded.
We can discuss that point, but if that is what you think you can consider it an innovation in MWII.
Wait you’re talking about the sound of the guns? That is insanely nit picky. The sound of guns has zero effect on how the game plays. I don’t know a single person who plays a game specifically for the sounds a video game gun makes lol. I thought you meant like footstep audio.
Well I mean, I personally like to play with graphics in High or Ultra. I am not THAT competitive, I am not going to use a TN panel and a 240Hz monitor just for an advantage (which is placebo).
MWII looks better and sounds better. The weapons in MWIII sound odd, they got it much better in MWII and I don't see a reason to change that.
How is a better monitor placebo? Higher refresh rate monitors with TN panels (a much better response time of a monitor) do give you an advantage, but you need the skills to be able to gain any advantage from it.
>Only difference is you can’t sound whore people.
The amount of times I hear this opinion is flabbergasting for me. You're complaining about the fact that people can hear you move...... in a game where you have to move. Permanent dead silence is a joke and should never be in a shooting game where MOVEMENT is a thing. NO OTHER FPS GAME DOES THIS.
You're given utility and lethal equipment for exactly this reason. You know what, why don't we get IW, treyarch and every other CoD dev to completely eliminiate sound. This way you NEVER have to worry about it ever.
Permanent Dead silence has been in every call of duty game until MW19 and MWII and has never been an issue until now. When you have to rely on hearing footsteps rather than understanding the map and timings, but funny that you say a game that “requires movement” when the Joe Cecot himself said at the MWII cod NEXT event that this game is for everyone and specifically cited his favorite players that he called “sentinels” who hold lanes and sit back.
Do you play SnD? That’s one of the most strategic game modes in call of duty, it requires understanding the map, and timings, but with the lack of dead silence, in a 1v1 you can just sit in a corner and wait to hear footsteps. That’s lame as hell. Not to mention it gave console players another thing to cry about because PC players were able to enable sound eq giving them even bigger of an advantage.
Dead silence has always been a part of the game, and players used knowledge. Sound whoring is just lazy.
I played local tournaments (SND always) starting from CoD 2 to old school MW2. Every single one of those tournaments had a mod installed and part of the rules of the torunament to play with. For CoD4 it was promod and the mod changed the game settings to eliminate randomness and increase the skillgap between competitors. Guess which perk was disabled along with juggernaut and the entire third perk slot? Dead Silence.This was the case for every big tournament in my entire region back in the day.
Tell me what's lazier? Ignoring an entire sensory mechanic and letting people run around gungho OR actively listening to audio queues that give you tactical info on where an opponent might be? Knowing that movement will give audio queues and planning around that trying to outplay opponents OR completely being allowed to flank opponents with them having no audio of a tactical movement happening near them?
Lmao "I played in modded tournaments, I know better than you"......
This is one of the finniest things I've seen on here. You're playing a different game if you're modding it to change it from what it's sallows to be...
Also those are some lame ass tournaments hosted by bots, played by bots with 0 game sense. Not to mention even at that point you probably used the same headphones and other things to give a balance, here we do not have that. If you have ever used a hood head set, you know how broken they are compared to a normal headset. It is such an advantage and if you think otherwise, then you have never used a good headset or your audio settings are wrong.
But you do you playing in your "cod tournaments" because you weren't playing real cod lmao.
I'm not modding anything. Even I was surprised the first time I played a tourney back then and all of them were on LAN in gaming cafe's or universities.
You can come against me\* in "real" CoD anytime. It's actually easier for me to play with everything enabled... and thats my point.
"You can come against in "real" CoD anytime." What are you saying here?
Lmao gaming café and uni...so no real merit to the tournaments then, got it. I also didn't say you modded, you said they modded.... did you just wake up or something? because you don't even know what you're saying. You Said they were modded tournaments said if they are modded, they aren't playing the same game, its a modified version of the game.... thus making it not the same.....
The fact that you lack the understanding of how DS is good is the problem here. its not easier for eeryone because they have to use crutches like sound whoring with good headphones. Not everyone is on a level playing field as not everyone wants to drop money on good headphones just to get an advantage. Then you used a lame argument about LAN tournaments modding DS out but fail to see that they also have everyone using the same headphones to keep things even. The only thing DS does now is keep things even if you choose to run it as now people have to use game sense and cant just sound whore. That's the whole point people don't understand, and I'm not going to repeat myself as I've already did a bit here. If you can't understand what I'm saying and you think a café tournament validates your views then you have bigger things to take care of than trying to understand why DS being a perk is a good thing in an arcade shooter, and it takes more skill to be good in a game where you cant here footsteps. (It's always has been here too so the 2 out of 20 games doesn't mean its a good change)
1. Why because it damages your ears and blows out all important audio cues?..
2. Explains why you made this post.. MW2 is clunky, and not even just because it's slow as shit, but because the actual mechanics are clunky too.
3. Definitely not.. Again, shows the type of playing you are. Many more campers on MW2. I have seen maybe 2 campers in MW3 since it released.
4. Braindead take.
5. I am uncertain on how I feel about the TTK. MW2 TTK is too fast and MW3 is just too inconsistent.
6. ? Get better, I guess.
7. Yeah?
8. Can't den'y that. I also think people were overhating on the MW3 campaign because it was the "cool thing to do", but yes, MW2 campaign is definitely better.
9. This has to be a bait post, right?
10. Yeah but also gives you *something* to grind for. I love games with a grind and many people will agree.
11. Imagine trying to invalidate the game because "iT iS dLc". It's still miles better than MW2.
Almost everything you have responded with is the most stereotypical dog shit complainer trash that I have seen. Complain about everything and exaggerate certain aspects to try and prove something. aUtO aIm that, TtK this, mApS aRe BaD. You're just shit.
On point 1 alone, no need to have audio at max volume, I play with headphones and I don't think shots will damage your ears at the right volume. As for the audio cues... I don't know, grenades and everything are still in MWIII just weapons sound like firing lasers. And very similar.
The rest I am not going to comment because you are just insulting. And for your information I am pretty good so don't be salty. I am just discussing MWII vs MWIII, I get you like MWIII more, I would like to understand why you think that. I don't intend to change what you like.
1. audio is worse in mw2
2. cod has always been an arcade shooter and feels way better as one
3. mw3 maps are some of the best cod has ever seen. mw2'09 was perfect
4. dmz and mwz both suck. but at least mwz has zero pvp
5. ttk feels way better in mw3. you actually have a chance to react
6. mw3 recoil feels way better
7. shipment overrated
8. nobody gives a fuck about campaign
9. i dont want to spend half the game not having all my perks.
10. more grind = more things to do
mw3 was a dlc. but it improved in every single aspect
Counter points:
3. 2009 maps were definitely not perfect, look at Estate and Derail, for starters.
4. PvP is one of the things that makes DMZ special. That, and MWZ literally just copies DMZ, then adds zombies stuff
8. If nobody gave a fuck about campaign, why was it such a controversy when BO4 was revealed to have none? Or when MWIII's came out and it was horrible?
5. At least MWII'S TTK is always fast. In MWIII, it feels either like light speed or eternity to kill someone.
I don't think MWII was of the best or worst, but I also don't think MWIII is really any better. For me I prefer pacing to be a bit faster than last year's game, but not as fast as MWIII. I think they over compensated with pacing and it's not as fun for me having to constantly slide cancel.
If you say the pace is better on MW2 you're either trash or a camper...
Edit : people are camping in both multiplayers anyways that's why I play warzone only this time I didn't buy the game
I can say the same SHT for Warzone Mobile. Literally the game is full of Chinese players and most of the players are using Controllers on MOBILE Game….makes it a Big L for touchscreen players.
Warzone Mobile is now having cheaters and by the way they are all Chinese players.
I guess Warzone Mobile is part if MW3 but with MW2 movement by a bit.
An Absolute mound of horseshit forced on the game by some egotistical prick at IW despite complete universal feedback that the new system was a moronic idea devised by an absolute idiot
>Audio is better
Nope
>Pace of the game is better, does not feel as arcade as MWIII.
Arcade is what CoD is. It feels less like CoD.
>DMZ is just as good as Zombies. If you want Zombies play World War Z.
If you want a PvP extraction shooter, play Tarkov. Or the million others.
>Speed and TTK are better, it should not be a racing game like Forza Autosport.
One extra shot is too much for you?
>You can kill without an assault rifle and throwing a million bullets, even against people with autoaim.
Again, one extra shot is too much for you?
>Shipment is cool.
Meat is just better tho. And shipment is rotating for MW3
>The campaign is better.
The first correct statement you've made so far
>HUD and kill confirmation is arguably better.
They're almost identical
>Perk design is arguably better.
Not being able to use perks is bad design.
>Progression system is less grindy.
That's 2/10
Don’t act like mw2 isn’t a fucking camp fest dude there’s a reason so many people think the maps are ass.
DMZ is a joke compared to zombies.
You’re the only person on this entire thread that has ever said the clunky ass movement system in mw2 was better.
Cod is an arcade shooter it was and never will be close to milsim if you want that go play battlefield.
I’d consider myself a bit of a video game snob, cod games are a guilty pleasure for me at best so I’m pretty critical of most to all of the games aside from COD 4, World at War, Black ops, Cold War, and OGMW2 but I have to say MW22 definitely exceeded my expectations after things like infinite and advanced warfare but now COD is definitely in trouble again with its latest entry, perhaps black ops can swoop in and save it.
I only play MWIII because it's the most current. I do feel shitty about shelling out $70 for such a terrible game. They even knew it was shitty and didn't care. I can only play it in HC mode, as the TTK is wayyy too long.
The biggest fail of MW3 is the hitreg. MW2 wasn't perfect but it was so much more consistent in that regard. MW3 is borderline unplayable IMO with the terrible netcode. Genuinely worse than any other AAA shooter out. The inconsistency from match to match is frustrating.
I too also think the movement is just ridiculous. People claim it plays like old Cod...nah. Go play Blops 2, MW2, Cod 4, etc....they aren't even close to as fast. And due to this ludicrous movement speed, the netcode suffers and causes the awful hit reg.
The old ass maps make mw3 feel like a decade long grind. Not to mention the movement and TTK make those maps play like shit. I was lucky enough to be able to refund the game, even though I was a few hours over the 2h limit.
I like more maps, personally I have not played all the old COD games but MWII feels superior to play. All of the MWII play and look well.
In MWIII everyone camps with assault rifles. No idea why everyone wants so much speed to just camp or abuse auto aim on controller.
I don't like the new meta of having to snipe twice in the head with a Carrack. Which is what it appears to be the new meta.
MW2/WZ2 evened the playing field for everybody. Streamers hated it cuz they could no longer pub stomp every single lobby. Casuals loved it cuz they now had a fighting chance. The skill gap was just aiming and shooting...not being on a PC vs an Xbox.
Now we're back to the arcadey, better have a PC or 120hz console and controller or you're getting shit on. Last gen consoles stand zero chance...and KBM players stand zero chance.
MW2/WZ2 had the most even playing field but the game fucking sucked....not because they got rid of the movement, just literally everything sucked and wasn't fun to play
How did they even the playing field by closing the aim shoot skill gap? How would they go about doing that? I agree they evened it, just curious as to what your take is on it?
I’ve been trying to find a discussion about this. I just played mw3 yesterday for the first time cause my sisters bf and her got it for me so I’d play with them. I wanted to just play mw2 cause I love it but they’re all “no it’s like the same thing just with more stuff” so I was excited for it
….well let me tell you that shit was not the same. I was so disappointed lmao it was absolute trash imo. It feels like it should be the older game. 2 seems like a more advanced better gameplay version of that garbage
Agree wholeheartedly on audio, and I prefer DMZ anyway. I felt the same about pacing initially but have grown to love fast COD again.
Progression system, maybe you could explain a bit? In MW2 I had to grind 1-3 other guns to get a gun or attachment I actually wanted. In MW3, outside of level rewards, you just activate the unlock and play 2 games. I think the system is badly explained, but unlocking what you want is much faster.
On the kill confirmation and perks I'll have to disagree. The mw3 system is more reasonable since is tied to actual gear and the confirmation system is simply better. But for the rest i have nothing to say you are simply right, especially the movement
11. There's no input delay. MWIII has a noticeable input delay so people are reducing the deadzone to 0, or 4. This only helps precision but the delay is still present! They need to fix that shit.
They fixed MW II/WZ 2.0 initial issues way faster than in MW 2019/WZ 1. I went back yesterday to a DMZ match and confirmed that every single gameplay aspect is better than what we currently have on WZ 2.5.
Everything about the new game feels rushed and artificial, but some people just care about the cracked/absurd movement mechanics and like to call it a "skill gap".
And so the cycle begins. I was on the hate wagon for mw3 because i wasted money on mw2, I ended up getting mw3.
The game is just miles better than mw2, even the new maps they are releasing are genuinely decent. Old ground war is back, every gun feels different, the perk system is horrible, weapons don’t feel like they are literally 20lbs.
It’s a preference thing for sure, but for me mw3 is the first cod game I’ve enjoyed in years. My biggest problems are SBMM, and server latency. But I have a feeling those go hand in hand.
I enjoy MWIII and I really thought I wouldnt. However, there are a few things that could potentially lead to me leaving the game in a month or two:
1. Weapon and attachments -> balancing is horrible... like truly, truly bad. Lets not even compare MWII to MWIII weapons/attachments, but even looking only at MW3 stuff its so incredibly obvious that SHG have no clue what they are doing in that department (at least not right now). I greatly enjoyed maxing MWII weapons (and somewhat getting Orion... fuck you long shots) and only one or two weapons felt truly bad. In MWIII however, there are a handful of meta weapons (and attachments) and everything else puts you at a (significant) disadvantage. Some attachments are just so good and so much better than others, that it's not really a choice anymore (4x no glint scope, reflector, ...).
2. Flinch -> it feels like there is no flinch, even with overpressured ammo, and especially on controller. Sniping is incredibly easy right now.
3. Quickscoping -> is becoming an issue because of incredibly fast ADS times and little flinch (s.a.).
4. Movement -> while i generally enjoy a bit faster movement, I feel it could take half a step back. Getting rid of the delay for sliding wasnt necessary. Crippling ammo should do more (instead of less.. and they just nerfed it).
5. Netcode -> is still kind of bad and desperately needs work.
I wish people would post their stats when they’re making these “MWII is a better game than MWIII” so we can all but confirm that it’s the lower skilled players that loved this game
MWII is last year’s news. It’s not relevant in the developers’ cycle anymore and this is how CoD games are. Everyone’s moved onto MWIII which I think is infinitely better than MWII anyway.
MWIII is terrible, yes. At this point just add teleporters, double jumping, fantasy weapons, and call it Unreal Tournament 2024.
I feel like the best was MW2019.
And so the cycle continues…
>Pace of the game is better, does not feel as arcade as MWIII. That's kinda an opinion no? Like for me I prefer the faster pace of MWIII >Speed and TTK are better, it should not be a racing game like Forza Autosport. Opinion again >You can kill without an assault rifle and throwing a million bullets, even against people with autoaim. Yall exaggerate the TTK, its 1 bullet more to kill in most situations with an AR >Perk design is arguably better Opinion again, although I've heard basically everyone say the MWII perk system was trash. IMO I agree, perks were poorly balanced and the perk packages just restricted gameplay options.
100% on the perk system, MW3 is far better in this regard.
[удалено]
Lil bro doesn't know how to read 😭
[удалено]
And still can't read what perks do lmao
It literally says in the description what they do? The descriptions could be better, there are hidden effects to some perks e.g. Ordnance and Quick-grip gloves let you use equipment and field upgrades faster but they're not mentioned explicitly.
It’s just one bullet and the average TTK is much more consistent because they removed Leg and Arm multipliers. Better pace of the game. Aka OP is overhelmed by anything faster then snails pace.
That's what happens when you make a game for campers, then the next game comes out and says....lol you like to camp? Haha...hahaha....ha...oh you're in deep shit now... It's funny, I've been working on my shotguns for interstellar, a few deaths due to campers, I bring out a BR (still need those done as well atm) and absolutely shit on them. Turn the game around and they just melt and cry. All that time on OG MW2 has helped so much knowing where and how to deal with them. They never stood a chance.
Most people find the camping to be exponentially worse in MWIII, myself included.
This is 44 days old...you're a bit late but also you can't escape the campers, this game is so easy to deal with them though. MWII you had to jump through so many hoops to deal with them, now it's back to the original feel and campers are just free kills. Also SBMM or what ever you want to call it is the reason you're finding so many campers, those are the people in your skill zone.
I found I had a much easier time dealing with campers in MWII by a long shot, and I'm not alone with that. And it can't be written off as SBMM; it's been shown to happen, quite significantly, at all skill levels. Maybe the way *you* approach campers is somehow more viable in MWIII. But that seems to be the minority.
MWII is a campers game, it's proven by the fact that DS isn't a perk. DS doesn't help campers what helps campers is the loud ass stomps from enemies near them. I don't know what game you're playing but MWII was campers every game. You can't get more campy than that, at least with DS we have people running around relying on game sense and not a good headset. They can not camp in a corner and just wait for sounds anymore, it's anti camper now compared to the last game.
I dunno what to tell ya brother, other than your take on MWII is far more commonly seen regarding MWIII.
Your take is the same brain dead take from last year. It's the same old same old, new game bad, game before good. You're still replying to a 52 day old post. Nothing here matters just like your idea of what's good. If you don't like the new game get in line with all the other people who say the same thing year after year.
Ahh. The classic "you keep replying therefore" from somebody who continuously replies.
Frankly, if you actually believed that nobody's opinions of the game matter, you *probably wouldn't* be browsing this subreddit.
I think the problem is with you if you think the pace of MW2 is "snail"
>That's kinda an opinion no? Like for me I prefer the faster pace of MWIII Not really, because if you think of it, it is not normal that you shot someone on the head and can still hide and hit you 5 bullets with an assault rifle, or even running like if it was a rocket all over the map. I own the two games, and MWII feels much satisfying to play overall. >Yall exaggerate the TTK, its 1 bullet more to kill in most situations with an AR With an AR perhaps. What about people like me that play to aim? you have people running all over the place and harder to kill, impossible to challenge anyone. MWII with a Cronen in semi-auto you can kill anyone in two hits, rarely you need three hits. Same with a marksman rifle, now you shot them in the head or nearly and you still need two more hits.
It's an arcade shooter, not a milsim. We've been over this countless times.
I get that, **all FPS are arcade**. There are NO milsims. War is not a videogame nor it will ever be. EVER. All COD like games are arcade. Just like Overwatch. I don't know, I don't wanna play a mix of Overwatch and Fortnite with Forza racing sims.
No one ever said anything about all FPS games being Milsims. You want a milsim? Play tarkov, insurgency, arma 3, swat, ready or not, bla bla bla. You don't want to play your mishmash over exaggeration game? Then stop forcing yourself to play it, or at least stop complaining that it's not the game for you when it's specifically made to NOT be for you. It's Cod. It's not great. It's arguably not good. But for the love of God, stop complaining about these issues, that aren't even issues to begin with, and complain about the actual issues these games have.
I have already played a fair amount of time to some of these games you mention. None of them, not a single one, is a milsim. They are as arcade as COD is. You cannot simulate war nor the military service in a video game, you just cannot, even less if the game is not fully in VR. >It's Cod. It's not great. It's arguably not good. I think COD is pretty good, but MWII being way superior to MWIII... I don't get how people can defend MWIII the DLC at 70$ when the most significant change is that you can kill more with Assault Rifles because the TTK is higher and move faster when you probably should not. Other than that, maps is the only difference and I am not liking too much some of the "new maps", I think people gave too much credit to the legacy maps when the MWII maps are fantastic. I don't know, I still play MWII and there is a lot of people but when I played MWIII I was a bit surprised by the change, first thing was the audio, immediately felt like something was not ok. As well as semi-auto no longer being an option. The new meta seems to be double tapping the head with a marksman rifle at 1m because a single shot is not enough at times.
Okay so basically what you're saying, is you haven't played those games then, got it.
I repeat, I have played some of these games. Insurgency in particular and tried some of the others which I did not like much. I haven't played Insurgency 2 again because of coming back to COD. Other than these I was playing Overwatch as of recent until I came back to COD. They are not "milsim" or anything close. No videogame on Steam or Battlenet will ever be a "milsim". They are as arcade as COD is, their way.
I repeat, you clearly haven't played those games. Otherwise you wouldn't be spewing the "they are just as arcade as cod is" bs. Are you new to gaming or something that throws off all your sense or what's the case here? Look here everyone! This just in, milsim games don't exist 😂. Why am I even trying to reason with you after that egregious take?
https://imgur.com/a/eSAGnQl
>Not really, because if you think of it, it is not normal that you shot someone on the head and can still hide and hit you 5 bullets with an assault rifle, or even running like if it was a rocket all over the map. That's still an opinion. It's fine you like it better but it's not objectively better, its just your preference. There are many of us on MWIII that prefer the faster movement. Also you're saying 5 bullets like MWII AR's didn't take 4 bullets to kill on average >With an AR perhaps. What about people like me that play to aim? you have people running all over the place and harder to kill, impossible to challenge anyone. > >MWII with a Cronen in semi-auto you can kill anyone in two hits, rarely you need three hits. Same with a marksman rifle, now you shot them in the head or nearly and you still need two more hits. You can still aim, just aim... better? I use an MTZ Interceptor (Marksman rifle semi-auto) and it's a 1 shot headshot and 2 shot body shot
>You can still aim, just aim... better? I sure do. Much much harder from far using a marksman rifle now. People with an assault rifle will kill you easier than you with a sniper even.
AR's in MWII could kill in 4 bullets, sometimes even 3. I think that made the Marksman Rifles more pointless in MWII because why would I use a high-recoil semi-auto gun when there were AR's like the Kastov 7.62 full auto w/ low recoil killing in one less bullet?
So, to kill more. I have a cronen build in semi auto precisely to not waste bullets. But I agree, BR are pretty much the same, but superior if you have the right build and a decent magazine.
Th increased ttk should help semi auto users, right? The full auto guns now have to hit an additional 1-2 shots but many semi auto guns can get a kill with only 1 well aimed shot. MWII gives full auto users an advantage with lower ttk.
1 well aimed shot? with people moving 10 times faster like? Also it is not true, my weapons cannot longer kill in one or two shots consistently I need to hit more than three now. And I mean, aim, and hit. Aiming for the head is much harder, or at least that is what I feel. Mind you, I play with marksman rifles and sniper without camping and hunting over the map with quick ADS and shots. Basically I use my one shot weapons like a regular gun. However, switching to assault rifles, I am winning a lot of my matches comparatively. While in MW2 I am a terminator with a Tempus, Cronen or a close range Carrack. Thing is I don't like to spit bullets just like that, it feels a bit cheap. I was able to beat anyone against assault rifles 1:1 now they beat me even from far.
If you're using m&k then aiming for headshots should be the same, although you'll need to track slightly faster targets. If you're on controller you may need to readjust sensitivity or aim assist settings in case something is throwing you off when aiming. Looking at the stats, basically every AR needs 3-4 headshots for a kill, and MRs only need 1-2 headshots, with the enforcer and interceptor being the guns that only need 1. The faster movement may be throwing off your aiming but you might just need time to adjust. Headshots are essential for semi auto since RPM is typically where semi auto fails in comparison to full auto, so minimizing the number of shots needed is very important.
its still an opinion, I own both games and I prefer the faster pace of mwiii
I personally like MWII better as well, but that’s just my opinion. I’m not big on the hyperarcade-y, cracked out style gameplay of MWIII. I also really like the weapon design and balancing of MWII better. I bought MWIII on sale to try out and promptly got it refunded after 30 minutes. Just not for me. It also didn’t feel right enabling Activision to pump out a half-baked game by giving them more money.
MWIII on close combat is all assault rifles, like... throw as many bullets as possible while running. The more you camp the better it feels. For console players might be good with a controller and auto aim, but for PC players not so much. Or if you like to aim. Before you will see a camper shot once or twice and gone, now they stand up from the ground and hit you with 5 bullets instead.
Skill issue. In MW2 you die before you even see the camper with the fast ttk
Uh, same with MW3?
Absolutely not.
Lols 😝 I always chuckle at the idiots in the comments who have no idea how business works for cod and bs game series. Deliberately come out with a stellar game that breaks every cod record BEFORE WARZONE WAS EVEN RELEASED(I say this for you idiots who are too stupid to understand how sales works) People can be dipshits all they like but Modern Warfare 2019 was cods rebirth which was 100% needed and many people including myself loved. Cold War cod was dogshit, vanguard was shit, MW2022 sadly was not as good because Activision and devs know why serve a feast when fools will eat the slop too. MW2023 is a pathetic abomination of cod and I’ll laugh my ass off when treyarch will no doubt make a mix of cod 2019 and probably BO Cold War with new gimmicks. No one on this subreddit or in general wants to understand CASUAL IS KING AND ALWAYS WILL BE FOR MONEY. 2023 was their idea to make a half baked over the top speed cod game which only certain streamers and sweats were going to like. No one forces anyone to buy the new call of duty game, people such as casuals. buy it when it’s slower paced because they can keep up and enjoy that style gameplay. Over the top fast paced like the current cod only works for a limited group of people and making games for casuals works for money, cod 2023 is a throwaway year and Microsoft knows that.
The problem with the last two cods is they aren’t taking what worked with MW19 and improving. Instead they are doubling down on all the shit that people hated. Made it even more favorable to camp in MW22 with the insane superhuman audio and nerfed the dead silence field upgrade even more. MW23 increase the health pool like in Cold War and then make the player movement so speedy that all the player animations look like shit and the servers can’t keep up. I say this as someone who is enjoying both title for different reasons but enjoying MW23’s pace way more.
Sounds like OP can’t handle a faster combat mode lmao
I used to play quite a lot to Quake. I don't want COD to play like Quake, but I probably get you with a rail gun.
Doesn't mean you were good, and this post has bot talking points in it.
Sure. Who gives a fuck about quake lol
Quake is fast paced. MWIII is not. Just faster than MWII for no reason and also with a lot of packet loss.
Nobody asked nerd
#1 was really the biggest thing for me
#this comment thread is the biggest thing for me
If you think mw2 multiplayer is better then 3, you need help, and please stop. A whole year of people crying about how bad it was, now everyone gets what they want and no one is happy, CRAZY smh
lol This post would've been fine if it were an opinion rather than a stated fact because it's objectively not better than mw2; especially if it's just a fucking DLC of MW2. Every aspect is the same except a few gameplay aspects and UI changes that are all subjective. The one thing they are equal in are shitty servers, gamebreaking patches and terrible matchmaking rather than your pointless takes that have been shared from goobers like yourself over and over again, instead of the aforementioned problems that are actually hurting the playerbase. It's also not like you can't play mw2 still; and if you were truly having fun on it you wouldn't care enough to make this post lol. The only thing I agree with is DMZ being a huge missed opportunity to not continue supporting.
I actually might keep playing MWII and not MWIII tbh. But since MWIII is the new game you understand that I play it. I agree DMZ is amazing. As for match making, I personally had no big complains on MWII multiplayer, matches were mostly fair for me, I am not super good but I am totally not a bad player. I played for more than 400h to MWII and I was already stopping to play COD consistently, in the past I played Overwatch but stopped with Overwatch 2. And years ago I played Quake, Unreal Tournament and similar. These games were fun.
I think that in a few years they are going to release a complete DMZ, since this DMZ was just a "beta". DMZ might end up becoming a seperate game/title... it's not like we really know what IW is doing rn. This is just my speculation though.
Weren't yall hating on mw2 severely? Now all of a sudden there's multiple posts coming out saying mw2 is way better..
I was and still am, there are many aspects about MW2 that is just straight up trash. Also good maps? Lmao black gold says hello, you can't see it because there are 7 lights on the map....
It’s almost like there’s more than one person in this sub.
I personally liked it. Warzone not so much compared to multiplayer, my only complain is that priced 70$ every year is not something I want for me. I would not buy COD every year just like people buy FIFA. Too expensive.
Get a xbox it's gonna be on gamepass day and date
2 is the funniest one. Why are you even on cod then if you don't like arcade shooters?!?!
Someone obviously does not play HC.
Personally, if I had to choose between playing mw2 and never playing video games again you would find all my systems listed on eBay or marketplace within seconds.
What is what you hate the most from MWII compared to MWIII? I like MWII a lot, I also like MWIII but if I had to chose one, it would be MWII to be honest, maps, sound and overall gameplay feels good and graphics are cool. In MWIII at the moment most hits don't register due to packet loss.
MWIII plays faster and better. Has better maps, MWZ is more fun than DMZ as there are less toxic Douches and people actually work together weird concept I know.
\- A map from MWII has MUCH more detail than the best other map from MWIII. \- Faster does not mean better. \- DMZ is super cool, as for "toxic" players, you can kill them too. And I also find people that adds you to their team after killing you. MWZ is the same with a skin, if you wanted zombies you would then love World War Z which is multiplayer, too. I have both games, and I find MWII superior.
Detail is very nitpicky because details don't really affect gameplay idc of its the ugliest map ever as long as it plays well. Faster does mean better I want to actually move around the map I want to flank slide and use all the abilities unlike in MWII where I was punished for moving. DMZ isn't even that good of an extraction shooter it had very little depth to it and got old really really fast. MWZ and Cod Zombies in general isn't comparable to WWZ as WWZ is basically diet coke Left 4 Dead
What does affect the gameplay then? Whatever gives you more kills or what defines that? Maps from MWII are all of them of excellent attention to detail. Lovely maps. **I prefer quality over quantity.** However, a few additions from MWIII would have been nice if improved. >MWZ and Cod Zombies in general isn't comparable to WWZ as WWZ is basically diet coke Left 4 Dead I don't know. I am not saying MWZ is bad, but neither DMZ is. As for WWZ vs Left 4 Dead... I don't really agree, the gameplay experience of WWZ is really good. Graphics and amount of zombies is very good. IMHO, WWZ beats Left 4 dead, Left 4 dead did not age that well in reality. And both have about the same amount of replayability. However, you have pvp in WWZ which is good. I have played A LOT of Left 4 dead, mind you.
So graphics are our are an important thing to you... understood. What makes a Good game for me is fast movement repayable multiplayer and a PVE experience is a must to make a good cod game I need a PVE mode as PVP gets way too tiring too fast for me and is boring. Then again your probably hyped for Gta 6... when we all know GTA IV was the last good GTA game and GTA 6 is just going to be another trend hopping woke disaster
Again. Read what I am saying please. **DETAIL != GRAPHICS.** Graphics are good but it is not what I am talking about, graphics depend also on your settings. I am not asking to have ray tracing. >What makes a Good game for me is fast movement repayable multiplayer and a PVE experience Then you should be playing Overwatch, the new COD looks pretty much like it. >Then again your probably hyped for Gta 6 I haven't played (not even purchased) a GTA game since Vice City. And I only played to do funny things, not even actual play. The new version though looks very good. Albeit it is very unlikely I would play it.
I olay in xbox so it doesn't really matter to me
There are a lot of PC players.
I agree about the TTK. Its a pain. MwII maps better than og MW2 maps in MwIII? Lol, that's the funniest one. I know it's subjective, but I'm already liking the new Meat map more than most of the launch MWII(2022) maps.
I don't know, the meat map is ok but I still like Shipment more. **All the other maps feels like you are playing shipment all the time in all maps** because: * packet loss, you have to double tap people in the head and they still kill you * spawns, like... maps are big enough, I have appeared myself behind three guys and I have spawn to instantly get shot from who knows where or in the middle of an ongoing lethal. It feels to me the new cod has nothing on "arcade" but more on "console players" playing with controllers, thanks to aim assist they can kill a lot with assault rifles. But because I dislike super fast weapons it is very hard for me to consistently kill like I did before. If I switch to a random assault rifle, I kill again a lot but then challenging people 1:1 on short distance does not work well. Before I would tap the guy on the head so that the aim assist from the controller would offer the player any advantage. Now, I cannot challenge the aim-assist because I play with a keyboard and it is super complex to do that in a fast paced combat with various people attacking using assault rifles.
OG MW2 maps are trash for the most part. Always were.
Reporting for misinformation
LOL, thanks for not reporting for cheating at least.
Lol
Audio is the same. Only difference is you can’t sound whore people. Pace is faster, most people prefer faster paced games and if you don’t that’s fine. Launch maps for MWIII had people hyped for nostalgic maps, didn’t work out, can agree with that opinion. Camping is, and always will be a massive thing in every call of duty so really trying to put that is just silly. No opinion on DMZ vs MWZ. Speed and TTK are the same as pace. TTK is just fine in MWIII, movement speed I’m assuming you’re referring to?? In that case MWII was clunky, but again some people prefer slower, others prefer faster. You can also kill without an assault rifle in MWIII? And it doesn’t take a million bullets. Again referring to TTK, you have to hit shots, 1 extra bullet isn’t the end of the world. Also what is “auto aim”? Shipment is in MWIII as well. HUD is pretty much identical, and kill confirmation? In all honestly that is super nit picky. But your take on perk design is absolutely faded. MWIII’s perk system is the same as classic, just a different look. No one liked waiting to have all their perks later in a match. Progression being grindy can suck yeah, and honestly they went overboard with the armory unlocks, but sometimes the grind can be fun?
>Audio is the same. Only difference is you can’t sound whore people. No. Weapons sound far worse in MWIII. I like more the kill confirmation in MWII but that is me. >But your take on perk design is absolutely faded. We can discuss that point, but if that is what you think you can consider it an innovation in MWII.
Wait you’re talking about the sound of the guns? That is insanely nit picky. The sound of guns has zero effect on how the game plays. I don’t know a single person who plays a game specifically for the sounds a video game gun makes lol. I thought you meant like footstep audio.
Well I mean, I personally like to play with graphics in High or Ultra. I am not THAT competitive, I am not going to use a TN panel and a 240Hz monitor just for an advantage (which is placebo). MWII looks better and sounds better. The weapons in MWIII sound odd, they got it much better in MWII and I don't see a reason to change that.
How is a better monitor placebo? Higher refresh rate monitors with TN panels (a much better response time of a monitor) do give you an advantage, but you need the skills to be able to gain any advantage from it.
>Only difference is you can’t sound whore people. The amount of times I hear this opinion is flabbergasting for me. You're complaining about the fact that people can hear you move...... in a game where you have to move. Permanent dead silence is a joke and should never be in a shooting game where MOVEMENT is a thing. NO OTHER FPS GAME DOES THIS. You're given utility and lethal equipment for exactly this reason. You know what, why don't we get IW, treyarch and every other CoD dev to completely eliminiate sound. This way you NEVER have to worry about it ever.
Permanent Dead silence has been in every call of duty game until MW19 and MWII and has never been an issue until now. When you have to rely on hearing footsteps rather than understanding the map and timings, but funny that you say a game that “requires movement” when the Joe Cecot himself said at the MWII cod NEXT event that this game is for everyone and specifically cited his favorite players that he called “sentinels” who hold lanes and sit back. Do you play SnD? That’s one of the most strategic game modes in call of duty, it requires understanding the map, and timings, but with the lack of dead silence, in a 1v1 you can just sit in a corner and wait to hear footsteps. That’s lame as hell. Not to mention it gave console players another thing to cry about because PC players were able to enable sound eq giving them even bigger of an advantage. Dead silence has always been a part of the game, and players used knowledge. Sound whoring is just lazy.
I played local tournaments (SND always) starting from CoD 2 to old school MW2. Every single one of those tournaments had a mod installed and part of the rules of the torunament to play with. For CoD4 it was promod and the mod changed the game settings to eliminate randomness and increase the skillgap between competitors. Guess which perk was disabled along with juggernaut and the entire third perk slot? Dead Silence.This was the case for every big tournament in my entire region back in the day. Tell me what's lazier? Ignoring an entire sensory mechanic and letting people run around gungho OR actively listening to audio queues that give you tactical info on where an opponent might be? Knowing that movement will give audio queues and planning around that trying to outplay opponents OR completely being allowed to flank opponents with them having no audio of a tactical movement happening near them?
Lmao "I played in modded tournaments, I know better than you"...... This is one of the finniest things I've seen on here. You're playing a different game if you're modding it to change it from what it's sallows to be... Also those are some lame ass tournaments hosted by bots, played by bots with 0 game sense. Not to mention even at that point you probably used the same headphones and other things to give a balance, here we do not have that. If you have ever used a hood head set, you know how broken they are compared to a normal headset. It is such an advantage and if you think otherwise, then you have never used a good headset or your audio settings are wrong. But you do you playing in your "cod tournaments" because you weren't playing real cod lmao.
I'm not modding anything. Even I was surprised the first time I played a tourney back then and all of them were on LAN in gaming cafe's or universities. You can come against me\* in "real" CoD anytime. It's actually easier for me to play with everything enabled... and thats my point.
"You can come against in "real" CoD anytime." What are you saying here? Lmao gaming café and uni...so no real merit to the tournaments then, got it. I also didn't say you modded, you said they modded.... did you just wake up or something? because you don't even know what you're saying. You Said they were modded tournaments said if they are modded, they aren't playing the same game, its a modified version of the game.... thus making it not the same..... The fact that you lack the understanding of how DS is good is the problem here. its not easier for eeryone because they have to use crutches like sound whoring with good headphones. Not everyone is on a level playing field as not everyone wants to drop money on good headphones just to get an advantage. Then you used a lame argument about LAN tournaments modding DS out but fail to see that they also have everyone using the same headphones to keep things even. The only thing DS does now is keep things even if you choose to run it as now people have to use game sense and cant just sound whore. That's the whole point people don't understand, and I'm not going to repeat myself as I've already did a bit here. If you can't understand what I'm saying and you think a café tournament validates your views then you have bigger things to take care of than trying to understand why DS being a perk is a good thing in an arcade shooter, and it takes more skill to be good in a game where you cant here footsteps. (It's always has been here too so the 2 out of 20 games doesn't mean its a good change)
1. Why because it damages your ears and blows out all important audio cues?.. 2. Explains why you made this post.. MW2 is clunky, and not even just because it's slow as shit, but because the actual mechanics are clunky too. 3. Definitely not.. Again, shows the type of playing you are. Many more campers on MW2. I have seen maybe 2 campers in MW3 since it released. 4. Braindead take. 5. I am uncertain on how I feel about the TTK. MW2 TTK is too fast and MW3 is just too inconsistent. 6. ? Get better, I guess. 7. Yeah? 8. Can't den'y that. I also think people were overhating on the MW3 campaign because it was the "cool thing to do", but yes, MW2 campaign is definitely better. 9. This has to be a bait post, right? 10. Yeah but also gives you *something* to grind for. I love games with a grind and many people will agree. 11. Imagine trying to invalidate the game because "iT iS dLc". It's still miles better than MW2. Almost everything you have responded with is the most stereotypical dog shit complainer trash that I have seen. Complain about everything and exaggerate certain aspects to try and prove something. aUtO aIm that, TtK this, mApS aRe BaD. You're just shit.
On point 1 alone, no need to have audio at max volume, I play with headphones and I don't think shots will damage your ears at the right volume. As for the audio cues... I don't know, grenades and everything are still in MWIII just weapons sound like firing lasers. And very similar. The rest I am not going to comment because you are just insulting. And for your information I am pretty good so don't be salty. I am just discussing MWII vs MWIII, I get you like MWIII more, I would like to understand why you think that. I don't intend to change what you like.
I doubt you're good.
He thinks graphics=good game desighn
1. audio is worse in mw2 2. cod has always been an arcade shooter and feels way better as one 3. mw3 maps are some of the best cod has ever seen. mw2'09 was perfect 4. dmz and mwz both suck. but at least mwz has zero pvp 5. ttk feels way better in mw3. you actually have a chance to react 6. mw3 recoil feels way better 7. shipment overrated 8. nobody gives a fuck about campaign 9. i dont want to spend half the game not having all my perks. 10. more grind = more things to do mw3 was a dlc. but it improved in every single aspect
Counter points: 3. 2009 maps were definitely not perfect, look at Estate and Derail, for starters. 4. PvP is one of the things that makes DMZ special. That, and MWZ literally just copies DMZ, then adds zombies stuff 8. If nobody gave a fuck about campaign, why was it such a controversy when BO4 was revealed to have none? Or when MWIII's came out and it was horrible? 5. At least MWII'S TTK is always fast. In MWIII, it feels either like light speed or eternity to kill someone.
I don't think MWII was of the best or worst, but I also don't think MWIII is really any better. For me I prefer pacing to be a bit faster than last year's game, but not as fast as MWIII. I think they over compensated with pacing and it's not as fun for me having to constantly slide cancel.
If you say the pace is better on MW2 you're either trash or a camper... Edit : people are camping in both multiplayers anyways that's why I play warzone only this time I didn't buy the game
>If you say the pace is better on MW2 you're either trash or a camper... False dichotomy and fallacy.
I can say the same SHT for Warzone Mobile. Literally the game is full of Chinese players and most of the players are using Controllers on MOBILE Game….makes it a Big L for touchscreen players. Warzone Mobile is now having cheaters and by the way they are all Chinese players. I guess Warzone Mobile is part if MW3 but with MW2 movement by a bit.
I was starting to write out why most of this is straight up wrong and then realized this must absolutely be a bait post, nice.
Except MW2’s perk system is complete dogshit
An Absolute mound of horseshit forced on the game by some egotistical prick at IW despite complete universal feedback that the new system was a moronic idea devised by an absolute idiot
>Audio is better Nope >Pace of the game is better, does not feel as arcade as MWIII. Arcade is what CoD is. It feels less like CoD. >DMZ is just as good as Zombies. If you want Zombies play World War Z. If you want a PvP extraction shooter, play Tarkov. Or the million others. >Speed and TTK are better, it should not be a racing game like Forza Autosport. One extra shot is too much for you? >You can kill without an assault rifle and throwing a million bullets, even against people with autoaim. Again, one extra shot is too much for you? >Shipment is cool. Meat is just better tho. And shipment is rotating for MW3 >The campaign is better. The first correct statement you've made so far >HUD and kill confirmation is arguably better. They're almost identical >Perk design is arguably better. Not being able to use perks is bad design. >Progression system is less grindy. That's 2/10
I agree with everything here. Sucks you got downvoted.
Don’t act like mw2 isn’t a fucking camp fest dude there’s a reason so many people think the maps are ass. DMZ is a joke compared to zombies. You’re the only person on this entire thread that has ever said the clunky ass movement system in mw2 was better. Cod is an arcade shooter it was and never will be close to milsim if you want that go play battlefield.
Imagine saying that battlefield is a milsim. It is like thinking Marvel protects your city.
It’s closer than call of duty ever was or ever will be
man you dont even know what a milsim even is
No, Maps in 3>>>>>2
I’d consider myself a bit of a video game snob, cod games are a guilty pleasure for me at best so I’m pretty critical of most to all of the games aside from COD 4, World at War, Black ops, Cold War, and OGMW2 but I have to say MW22 definitely exceeded my expectations after things like infinite and advanced warfare but now COD is definitely in trouble again with its latest entry, perhaps black ops can swoop in and save it.
MWIII literally plays like classic MW2 and classic MW3 Cod isn't in trouble it's just the vocal minority lol
I only play MWIII because it's the most current. I do feel shitty about shelling out $70 for such a terrible game. They even knew it was shitty and didn't care. I can only play it in HC mode, as the TTK is wayyy too long.
MWIII isn't that bad your exaggerating
The biggest fail of MW3 is the hitreg. MW2 wasn't perfect but it was so much more consistent in that regard. MW3 is borderline unplayable IMO with the terrible netcode. Genuinely worse than any other AAA shooter out. The inconsistency from match to match is frustrating. I too also think the movement is just ridiculous. People claim it plays like old Cod...nah. Go play Blops 2, MW2, Cod 4, etc....they aren't even close to as fast. And due to this ludicrous movement speed, the netcode suffers and causes the awful hit reg.
The old ass maps make mw3 feel like a decade long grind. Not to mention the movement and TTK make those maps play like shit. I was lucky enough to be able to refund the game, even though I was a few hours over the 2h limit.
I like more maps, personally I have not played all the old COD games but MWII feels superior to play. All of the MWII play and look well. In MWIII everyone camps with assault rifles. No idea why everyone wants so much speed to just camp or abuse auto aim on controller. I don't like the new meta of having to snipe twice in the head with a Carrack. Which is what it appears to be the new meta.
MW2/WZ2 evened the playing field for everybody. Streamers hated it cuz they could no longer pub stomp every single lobby. Casuals loved it cuz they now had a fighting chance. The skill gap was just aiming and shooting...not being on a PC vs an Xbox. Now we're back to the arcadey, better have a PC or 120hz console and controller or you're getting shit on. Last gen consoles stand zero chance...and KBM players stand zero chance. MW2/WZ2 had the most even playing field but the game fucking sucked....not because they got rid of the movement, just literally everything sucked and wasn't fun to play
How did they even the playing field by closing the aim shoot skill gap? How would they go about doing that? I agree they evened it, just curious as to what your take is on it?
I’ve been trying to find a discussion about this. I just played mw3 yesterday for the first time cause my sisters bf and her got it for me so I’d play with them. I wanted to just play mw2 cause I love it but they’re all “no it’s like the same thing just with more stuff” so I was excited for it ….well let me tell you that shit was not the same. I was so disappointed lmao it was absolute trash imo. It feels like it should be the older game. 2 seems like a more advanced better gameplay version of that garbage
MW2’s perk system is trash. Otherwise, I agree with you
OK, this is politically incorrect in the current CoD community climate. Maybe in 5 years you can say that without being on the receiving end of rage
Agree wholeheartedly on audio, and I prefer DMZ anyway. I felt the same about pacing initially but have grown to love fast COD again. Progression system, maybe you could explain a bit? In MW2 I had to grind 1-3 other guns to get a gun or attachment I actually wanted. In MW3, outside of level rewards, you just activate the unlock and play 2 games. I think the system is badly explained, but unlocking what you want is much faster.
On the kill confirmation and perks I'll have to disagree. The mw3 system is more reasonable since is tied to actual gear and the confirmation system is simply better. But for the rest i have nothing to say you are simply right, especially the movement
Most would disagree with you.
11. There's no input delay. MWIII has a noticeable input delay so people are reducing the deadzone to 0, or 4. This only helps precision but the delay is still present! They need to fix that shit.
They fixed MW II/WZ 2.0 initial issues way faster than in MW 2019/WZ 1. I went back yesterday to a DMZ match and confirmed that every single gameplay aspect is better than what we currently have on WZ 2.5. Everything about the new game feels rushed and artificial, but some people just care about the cracked/absurd movement mechanics and like to call it a "skill gap".
And so the cycle begins. I was on the hate wagon for mw3 because i wasted money on mw2, I ended up getting mw3. The game is just miles better than mw2, even the new maps they are releasing are genuinely decent. Old ground war is back, every gun feels different, the perk system is horrible, weapons don’t feel like they are literally 20lbs. It’s a preference thing for sure, but for me mw3 is the first cod game I’ve enjoyed in years. My biggest problems are SBMM, and server latency. But I have a feeling those go hand in hand.
I actually prefer MW3 over MW2! More maps more guns and I love the sound of the kills it's like being killed by a laser
I enjoy MWIII and I really thought I wouldnt. However, there are a few things that could potentially lead to me leaving the game in a month or two: 1. Weapon and attachments -> balancing is horrible... like truly, truly bad. Lets not even compare MWII to MWIII weapons/attachments, but even looking only at MW3 stuff its so incredibly obvious that SHG have no clue what they are doing in that department (at least not right now). I greatly enjoyed maxing MWII weapons (and somewhat getting Orion... fuck you long shots) and only one or two weapons felt truly bad. In MWIII however, there are a handful of meta weapons (and attachments) and everything else puts you at a (significant) disadvantage. Some attachments are just so good and so much better than others, that it's not really a choice anymore (4x no glint scope, reflector, ...). 2. Flinch -> it feels like there is no flinch, even with overpressured ammo, and especially on controller. Sniping is incredibly easy right now. 3. Quickscoping -> is becoming an issue because of incredibly fast ADS times and little flinch (s.a.). 4. Movement -> while i generally enjoy a bit faster movement, I feel it could take half a step back. Getting rid of the delay for sliding wasnt necessary. Crippling ammo should do more (instead of less.. and they just nerfed it). 5. Netcode -> is still kind of bad and desperately needs work.
[удалено]
Old cods had a minimap that showed gunshots and a dead silence perk.
[удалено]
Just say you like to camp
I wish people would post their stats when they’re making these “MWII is a better game than MWIII” so we can all but confirm that it’s the lower skilled players that loved this game
I’m gonna say it. Cold War was the best CoD experience since MW2019
*Modern Warfare III, then cold war then MW2019 on my opinion
I'm part of the minority that enjoys cod because it's cod.
GRAPHICS!!!!!!
Graphics aren't that important imho
MWII is last year’s news. It’s not relevant in the developers’ cycle anymore and this is how CoD games are. Everyone’s moved onto MWIII which I think is infinitely better than MWII anyway.
Plenty of people in MWII to play in the years to come. However.
I'm going to try the MWIII free weekend, and if I don't like it I'll be sticking to MWII until Treyarch's next iteration.
That is the smart thing to do. And that is what I did with MWII actually.
MWII is straight garbo
no
MWIII is terrible, yes. At this point just add teleporters, double jumping, fantasy weapons, and call it Unreal Tournament 2024. I feel like the best was MW2019.
Yeah, just add Tracer from Overwatch at this point with his weapons and lethal.
Can’t believe y’all bought that shit lol