tubbs51 Posted May 30, 2011 Share Posted May 30, 2011 Here's my ideas... Keep shotguns as Primaries but make them about as powerful as they were in MW2 but make it to where theres no Akimbo shotties. Keep 'Nade launchers but make them similar to Black Ops system (i barely ever get tubed outside of some objective modes). Make sure no Rust sized maps ever make it into a Hardcore mode. I have no issues with the CoD point so keep them but tweak it to where you can bypass unlocking a gun by paying a very hefty price (i'm thinking $1,000 Cod points for every level between you and the gun EX. if it was in black ops and if you were a level 4 and wanted the Commando it'd cost you $40,000 CoD Points). If you wait to unlock it it'll only be the standard $2 grand. The part of MW2 i hated was having to use my least favorite attachments to unlock the attachments i wanted. I love BO giving you the chance to buy the attachments instead of using a hated attachment for forever to unlock one that you'll actually use. For killstreaks do it some what similar to BO. Make sure the killstreaks dont add up to each other and like some one else said dont make the Nuke an "End of Game" kill streak. One issue though is with Hardcore if some one drops a nuke they'll get kicked for team killing immediatly. Other than that i like how Black ops has the killstreaks. Make Warlord Pro not only add an extra Tactical and lethal grenade but also an additional attachment slot that could be used on your primary or secondary. Like say for instance with Warlord pro i could have Silencer, ACOG, and Extended Mag on my primary or i could have silencer and extended mag on my Secondary. BUT for the love of god keep it to where if you have a 'Tube you cant have another attachment. And put silencers back on LMGs but make them fairly expensive (EX. $5000). Take Akimbo off. I find it ridiculously retarded when a guy is running around with dual primaries. I dont have many issues with Akimbo Pistols but when a guy is running around and spraying and praying with two SMGs its a bit retarded in my book. Make a Hardcore variation of every Core Playlist and gamemodes. Keep Combat Training, its not super usefull but its fun. And i think it'd be cool if you could edit your guy somewhat more like face, skin color, voice and make it to where all perks affect the look of your character. just what i want in MW 3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aquateen87 Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 I wish they went back to the regular roots: No perks,no attachments, no killstreaks, drivable vehicle. Pretty much what United Offensive offered. Gosh I miss that game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moth Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 Guess what though, the majority of the CODs have the perks and killstreaks, so in way that is part of what makes COD, COD. If you want something without the perks and killstreaks, try Battlefield 3, because I don't think COD will ever ditch the perks and killstreaks. And no attachments? Ever modern shooter has them, and also many WWII shooters aswell, so that is not going to happen. Battlefield 3 will have drivable vehicles, just like Battlefield 2 and Bad Company 1-2. Formerly known as The General Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manofpeace Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405...ttoWhatsNewsTop Consumers are used to paying $60 each for videogames that run on consoles like the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360. Now the publisher behind the industry's biggest videogame franchise— "Call of Duty"—is about to find out whether it can get them to pay a monthly bill, too. Activision Blizzard Inc. plans to launch an online service called Call of Duty Elite this fall that will work with the next major edition of the game, "Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3," and future installments of the hyper-realistic combat-simulation game. In a move industry executives describe as a first, Activision plans to charge a monthly subscription fee for the service, which will provide extra content that isn't offered on game discs sold in stores, including downloadable map packs that give players new "Call of Duty" levels to play. Activision executives said they haven't yet figured out how much to charge for the service, but they expect the cost to be less than fees for comparable online-entertainment services, such as a $7.99-a-month Netflix Inc. movie subscription. Portions of the service will be free, including features inspired by Facebook Inc. that will let "Call of Duty" players meet for online gun battles with others who share various affiliations and interests. Another feature of the service will give "Call of Duty" players tools, modeled on those from stock-trading websites, to analyze their performance within the game, gauging factors such as which weapons have been most successful for them in killing enemies. The plan—which comes a week ahead of the videogame industry's big E3 trade show in Los Angeles—is a potentially risky bet by Activision that it can further milk profits from consumers, who could feel the $60 they spend on "Call of Duty" in stores is enough. Charging a monthly subscription fee is more common for multiplayer games that run on personal computers. The most successful of those is "World of Warcraft," a fantasy game from Activision's Blizzard division that has over 11 million subscribers, who typically pay $15 a month for the service. For players with a Microsoft Corp. Xbox 360 console, a Call of Duty Elite subscription will come on top of the $9.99 monthly fee they typically pay for Xbox Live, the online game service that provides players of all Xbox games to meet and compete against others online. Sony Corp.'s PlayStation 3 console owners don't pay a monthly fee to play against others online. The PlayStation Network that provides those multiplayer capabilities recently suffered an outage of more than three weeks after a hacker intrusion on the service. Players of PC versions of "Call of Duty" don't pay to play others online. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finn 7 five 11 Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 One thing i was hoping to see was claymores staying in place after you die for a minute before disappearing that way teams could set up minefields and herd the other teams into them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aquateen87 Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 (edited) Guess what though, the majority of the CODs have the perks and killstreaks, so in way that is part of what makes COD, COD. If you want something without the perks and killstreaks, try Battlefield 3, because I don't think COD will ever ditch the perks and killstreaks. And no attachments? Ever modern shooter has them, and also many WWII shooters aswell, so that is not going to happen. Battlefield 3 will have drivable vehicles, just like Battlefield 2 and Bad Company 1-2. As in attachments, I really don't care however I just don't want them getting carried away with them though. Some of them are unneccesary. I am getting Battlefield 3 anyway. I'm just a little concerned of what there going to put in Mw3. Edited May 31, 2011 by aquateen87 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FullMetal Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 "Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3," and future installments of the hyper-realistic combat-simulation game oh lord LOL And most WW2 shooters nowadays that use 'attachement systems' suck balls. It's not because games with those feature sell like hot cakes that it's the way to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleBlueTroll Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 I hope MW3 steers well clear of the COD points system black ops used, i love unlocking guns and perks by ranking up, not being able to buy them whenever i wanted. Same with the camos, being able to buy camos was the worst idea ever, i enjoy earning my camos threw use and accuracy with the gun, not via purchase. And aswell i hope they keep the title and emblem idea, not "create your own" just like mw2 when you unlock them by completing challenges, i think its a better idea because (unless someones hacked their titles and emblems) you know what players like what, what challenges they have completed, and i find it more interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinatown Wars Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 @the cod pay for play That's just for free extra maps and DLC. You can still play online with friends for free without getting it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilya Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 "Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3," and future installments of the hyper-realistic combat-simulation game oh lord LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinatown Wars Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 "Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3," and future installments of the hyper-realistic combat-simulation game oh lord LOL Who let Michael bay write that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vertical limit Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 Here's my ideas... Keep shotguns as Primaries but make them about as powerful as they were in MW2 but make it to where theres no Akimbo shotties. I will have to disagree sorry. I like it when it was like in MW2. If you notice in missions like the last one in Black Ops and the mission Victor Charlie and also WMD. They give you a: Primary: Famas Secondary: Mac 11 Primary: Commando Secondry: KS-13 ( a shotgun) Primary: Aug Secondary: A pistol The first 2 have a shotgun and smg for secondary. The way it should be. Akimbo is cool, I love a dual wielded Desert Eagle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breaking Bohan Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 (edited) "New ‘Elite’ service will include a monthly fee for some offerings" .... Regarding the WSJ COD-subscription fee story: I've enjoyed the COD series, although I didn't purchase the last game due to all the terrible reviews, but there is no way I will buy MW3 if one has to pay a monthly subscription to access MP or features that used to be available on previous games. I sincerely hope that this new subscription service is only for additional perks because although I enjoy COD, I don't enjoy it enough to pay an extra $10/mo just to play on-line. Also, will people still have to pay for DLC (map packs, etc) in addition to this new subscription fee? Edited May 31, 2011 by Breaking Bohan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean_R_LFC Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 Sold all my CoD games, sure won't be buying this one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunrise Driver Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 Surely CoD Multiplayer is gonna look like Battlefield Play4Free or Ghost Recon Online. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FullMetal Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 Surely CoD Multiplayer is gonna look like Battlefield Play4Free or Ghost Recon Online. I must admit that Ghost Recon Online looks actually more interesting than (no matter which) one of the recent CoD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claude4Catalina Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 Here's my ideas... Keep shotguns as Primaries but make them about as powerful as they were in MW2 but make it to where theres no Akimbo shotties. I will have to disagree sorry. I like it when it was like in MW2. If you notice in missions like the last one in Black Ops and the mission Victor Charlie and also WMD. They give you a: Primary: Famas Secondary: Mac 11 Primary: Commando Secondry: KS-13 ( a shotgun) Primary: Aug Secondary: A pistol The first 2 have a shotgun and smg for secondary. The way it should be. Akimbo is cool, I love a dual wielded Desert Eagle. if they could make it that infantry get an assault rifle or submachine gun and a shotgun or pistol for close quarters, but if you have a specialist weapon, such as sniper rifle, light machine gun or launcher (make it a damn primary), you could carry the specialist as your primary and either a shotgun or suchmachine gun so you would each play a role, think about a team of six (theorectically) Rifleman M4A1 with Holographic M1014 Grenadier M16A4 with Grenade Launcher Colt M1911 Close Quarters MP5A4 with Red Dot Sight SPAS 12 Marksman M14 EBR P90 Machine Gunner M240 with ACOG (add an Elcan sight as an ACOG stand in?) M1014 Demolitions Expert AT-4 MP5A4 with ACOG this is just in theory, this way you wont get people with M16A4's with Grenader Launchers and an RPG, doubling up on their firepower. it is a bit restrictive but I think having your sidearm depend on your secondary would balance a small aspect of the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 "New ‘Elite’ service will include a monthly fee for some offerings" .... Regarding the WSJ COD-subscription fee story: I've enjoyed the COD series, although I didn't purchase the last game due to all the terrible reviews, but there is no way I will buy MW3 if one has to pay a monthly subscription to access MP or features that used to be available on previous games. I sincerely hope that this new subscription service is only for additional perks because although I enjoy COD, I don't enjoy it enough to pay an extra $10/mo just to play on-line. Also, will people still have to pay for DLC (map packs, etc) in addition to this new subscription fee? This is just retarded. And it pisses me off because I know that lots of people will buy it and encourage them to do this. Does anybody know the price p/month? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 You know...I have mixed feelings on this whole monthly sub sh*t with a CoD game. I had no problem paying $15 when I played WoW. But this, this is different. In order to acquire all perks of total CoD experience we have to pay presumably $5-10 a month? I mean, I can afford it no problem, but really? Ehh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyler Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 You know...I have mixed feelings on this whole monthly sub sh*t with a CoD game. I had no problem paying $15 when I played WoW. But this, this is different. In order to acquire all perks of total CoD experience we have to pay presumably $5-10 a month? I mean, I can afford it no problem, but really? Ehh. It just feels different, though. With WoW, you're getting a lot more bang for your buck. This is basically a payment feature for things you used to get for free, but now have to pay for monthly just to keep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 Activision's idea doesn't surprise me at all and I honestly can't say I don't support it. If people are stupid enough to pay for it, they'd be bad businessmen if they didn't do it. Then again, I've given up on this series entirely, so I'm looking at this from a business viewpoint, not a consumer viewpoint. You guys have all the right in the world to be enraged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prometheus Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 "New ‘Elite’ service will include a monthly fee for some offerings" .... Regarding the WSJ COD-subscription fee story: I've enjoyed the COD series, although I didn't purchase the last game due to all the terrible reviews, but there is no way I will buy MW3 if one has to pay a monthly subscription to access MP or features that used to be available on previous games. I sincerely hope that this new subscription service is only for additional perks because although I enjoy COD, I don't enjoy it enough to pay an extra $10/mo just to play on-line. Also, will people still have to pay for DLC (map packs, etc) in addition to this new subscription fee? This is just retarded. And it pisses me off because I know that lots of people will buy it and encourage them to do this. Does anybody know the price p/month? It's hinted that it will going to be "less than fees for comparable online-entertainment services, such as a $7.99-a-month Netflix Inc.", which i predict will be $5. So lets say that, $60 for the game, $30 for the DLCs, $60 for the elite subscription...full package roughly $150. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vertical limit Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 Activision can make anything look good, it can make sh*t look good so you can buy it. But it is worth a shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 You know...I have mixed feelings on this whole monthly sub sh*t with a CoD game. I had no problem paying $15 when I played WoW. But this, this is different. In order to acquire all perks of total CoD experience we have to pay presumably $5-10 a month? I mean, I can afford it no problem, but really? Ehh. It just feels different, though. With WoW, you're getting a lot more bang for your buck. This is basically a payment feature for things you used to get for free, but now have to pay for monthly just to keep. Yeah, that's what I was leaning to also. I mean, I was paying for a lot when I played WoW. I was nerd raged with it so I spent a lot of time. With CoD, I don't. I hop on for a game or two and then I'm off. And I already do that now for...my Xbox Live fee. I guess it depends what they offer. If we get some bonus maps that other people don't for paying $5 a month then I'll at least check it out for one month. We'll see. $5 is chump change...it's just weird, really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Zilcho Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 What the f*ck is this ridiculous corporate prostituting bullsh*t? I had been expecting something like this to happen in the near future (due to the trends of rip off DLCs) but this is a step up. I can't f*cking believe how low they've stooped, although I shouldn't really be surprised because they are after all a company after money, unlike other studios it appears they don't give a flying f*ck about anything else. I've got a great idea, how about for MW4 you buy the game, but it only comes with 1 perk and gun. In order to play it normally, you plug a cable into your jugular and inject blood directly into your console. The more pints, the more perks! f*cking assholes. U R B A N I T A S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vertical limit Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 An AK-47 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Zilcho Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 Not sure if this has been found already. Here is a video with more information on how Activision is going to bleed us dry. Also, at the end of the video is a small clip of MW3. I mean, very, very small. Clicky. U R B A N I T A S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OchyGTA Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 Not sure if this has been found already. Here is a video with more information on how Activision is going to bleed us dry. Also, at the end of the video is a small clip of MW3. I mean, very, very small. Clicky. That video is too funny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claude4Catalina Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 An AK-47 we've seen these pics before, I put together a weapons list a few pages ago, there's no need to repost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tubbs51 Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 "New ‘Elite’ service will include a monthly fee for some offerings" .... Regarding the WSJ COD-subscription fee story: I've enjoyed the COD series, although I didn't purchase the last game due to all the terrible reviews, but there is no way I will buy MW3 if one has to pay a monthly subscription to access MP or features that used to be available on previous games. I sincerely hope that this new subscription service is only for additional perks because although I enjoy COD, I don't enjoy it enough to pay an extra $10/mo just to play on-line. Also, will people still have to pay for DLC (map packs, etc) in addition to this new subscription fee? This is just retarded. And it pisses me off because I know that lots of people will buy it and encourage them to do this. Does anybody know the price p/month? It's hinted that it will going to be "less than fees for comparable online-entertainment services, such as a $7.99-a-month Netflix Inc.", which i predict will be $5. So lets say that, $60 for the game, $30 for the DLCs, $60 for the elite subscription...full package roughly $150. From what I understand as long as you're a subscriber to Elite you get the DLCs for free... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts