Here is the reveal trailer. [video=youtube;x3tedlWs1XY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3tedlWs1XY[/video] I think this one is way out in left field man. I see this game failing.
You do have a point, but how new and different is it? It is just a face lift with new gadgets and weaponry really, that is over the top from what I can see here. I guess a wait and see approach for MP game play should be taken, but I just don't see it being much different from a game play standpoint at the end of the day.
I will agree with you that it looks kind of weird, and I have my doubts about if it will be a good game. It seems there may be a lot of vehicle driving in this game. I give them credit for at least moving away from the typical ww2/vietnam story line.
I'll stand in line with the rest of the schmucks at midnight probably... let's hope the online multiplayer is better than Modern Warfare 3.
COD was bound to move to the future eventually. I'm sure it will be the same crap game with different skins as usual, but at least they're trying something "new".
I'm not getting it until I'm sure my friends are definitely going to play it for more then 2 weeks. *shakes fist in direction of MW3*
Typical for CoD to market themselves on the singleplayer story - which is not even what makes them popular and successful. Since that is all we have to go on thus far..... 2025, and our entire military moves to rely entirely on drones? They should have just targeted 2050 or beyond with that nonsense, as even with the major advances we have already had in drone tech - we are no where even in the vicinity of "replacing" our forces with them, they are used to supplement forces as well as give us a better option for risky missions in enemy territory. I would probably even roll my eyes at 2050, our military leaders are not so stupid to move in that direction while allowing for them to be hacked. Anyways, its kinda sad that the first "futuristic" cod game isnt really that far into the future and basically is all about drone technology. I would have preferred some more creative thinking about a future war than this crap.
Bad game....they never balanced the weaponry in that game to be legitimately futuristic. Its pretty sad when future weapons that utilize lasers, etc seem weaker than their older age counterparts. I also think the scale of Battlefield makes the games quite different. A more infantry-based futuristic game focused on close quarters could lend alot more to it being unique than the way 2143 had to approach things. I guess what I am getting at is the ground fighting in 2143 left alot to be desired, while CoD has long had that element locked down. A future style CCB shooter is something we havnt really seen in the mainstream.
That was 2142. There are some easter eggs in BF3 that suggest they will make a 2143, so who knows how that will work out. Back to COD, I applaud the fact that they are trying something different, but I just think it is more the same unfortunately.
Ahh I did not know about 2143. I am pretty confident the main problems for 2142 were that it was based on the limited BF2 engine. It just came off as a more-than-usual polished mod. The sad thing is that I always felt that modders would at least get the weapon balancing to be more fitting with a futuristic game. One thing I will say though, I did like the change of pace gameplay that 2142 brought in with the invading and destroying the enemy base-ship(dont recall what the mode was called, its been too long). If they could take that up another level and give us some improved CQB I have to say I am interested.
I'm glad this game is going to be a futuristic "What if Machines turned on us" type of thing, because the Terminator, Matrix and Deus Ex just didn't give me my fill. (That was sarcasm. Oh, you got that? Ok, sorry. Just wanted to make it clear this is a tired cliche of a genre))
Not excited about the trailer at all. The graphics engine really shows its age, and the story and setting are pretty uninteresting to me. I think the upcoming Ghost Recon game will handle the near-future setting much better, and I think Crysis 3 will be far superior overall.
To be fair, it seems this isnt quite that cliche...................... Instead they are gonna have the russians behind it. Cliche of Duty
I hope so. Ive been a GR fanboy since the beginning....Owning GR on pc & all modern consoles from ps2+, it has been a mainstay for me over the years. It also became the only big budget realistic(tactic-wise) shooter back then after they decided to make Rainbow Six into an arcade game....Which I am still seething over RIP R6 Rogue Spear
THANK YOU! I HATED when they watered Rainbow 6 down! Back in the day (N64 days I think) I saw a trailer for a R:6 type heist game where they were taking down a train full of baddies. I drooled over it...it never came out, and then R:6 went the way it did....terrible for strategy enthusiats!
Well it's Treyarch, so I'll play. Had/have really high expectations for this game, but the trailer is a big turn off. Campaign will be dog**** as per usual, but multiplayer if anything like the first Black Ops installment should be good. Oh, and I'm sure there will be zombies so that's a plus.
Original GR for PC was awesome. MP Embassy map is still one of my favorites. That is the game that got me into PC gaming way back.
2142 wasn't a mod, it was a stand alone released by EA and Dice. Signs point to the same for 2143. They will likely use Frostbite 2 since they have all the coding done for BF3, but Frostbite 3 is out too, so they may convert over to the new engine for the supposed future release.
Oh I understand that, I was implying that it felt like a well polished mod. The older engine used for BF2 was reused, which even modders for BF2 itself were not happy with as it was ancient in 2008. Even though it was a standalone game, it was built on the framework from BF2 - and I feel that was what lead to a very underwhelming game. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refractor_Engine Variation of the same engine used to build every BF game until BF3. I have high hopes for a Futuristic BF game built on Frostbite2
What bothers me is how they always use their SP campaign to promote the game, and the only achievements/trophies are in SP...I mean I can understand that the campaign provides them with more cinematic scenes fit for a short clip, but none of my friends that play CoD have ever completed any of the campaigns. I usually complete them just to roll my eyes for a few hours, but these commercials that constantly promote the campaign as some kind of amazing component to the game only serve to confuse the ignorant. One of my buddies who I got into CoD during Black Ops....I literally had to argue with him for an hour that he wouldn't be riding/fighting snowmobiles in any online match. He was pretty confused lol.
Is that so???? Wow! CoD's single player campaigns have literally, gone down the drain, with hardly any playtime, and not to mention, some very stupid storylines, and yet they do this. From what I see, I don't think, its going to be any different this time, just with some rather cosmetic changes. Going to miss out on this edition. Rooting for ArmA 3>>>>>
What bothers me is that it would be so simple to fix the campaign. All they have to do is turn it into a style of campaign where there are X amount of bad guys per stage / checkpoint / etc. Make them tough to kill, but once they're dead they are dead. No constant re spawning of baddies that only stops upon reaching a certain checkpoint. Make it possible to attack from different vantage points / avenues. Make it less of a ****ing ****ty CGI movie and more of a real ****ing game. No mashing the X button during a stupid but "Whoa DUDE AWESOME GRAPHICS" cut scene. I have to believe I'm not the only player who would prefer this. Otherwise, not sure why Halo, Gears of War, other shooters like these do so well. Then you've got an enjoyable campaign and an enjoyable multiplayer experience. The fact that the campaign in these games are so terrible really blows. Now that I'm a father I think my days of playing multiplayer games that can't be paused are effectively over. Unless anyone has any tips for me.
I know this is going to drive some of you nuts, but this has me excited. Zombies is so much better than spec ops or whatever the hell the MW version is called.
Can't wait for the release!!! The multiplayer mode was kind of crap in the first one tho. Story was good, much better than the story of MW3, that was a total disaster in my opinion. Very futuristic, but it didn't make any sense. But the multiplayer in MW3 was more fun. It was so addictive, that I wouldn't realise how the hands on my Franck Muller watch would go around for many hours until it was morning. Hopefully BK ops II will have both, an interesting story and a fun multiplayer mode.
I'm not going to spoil anything here. Just… watch. You'll know it when you see it. Especially if you watch YouTube a lot. [video=youtube;4wIZp_E2CxQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wIZp_E2CxQ[/video]
You too kind sir. But I do have a feeling you will be MIA from here and anything non AC3 related with red eyes and 36 cups of coffee in ya to stay awake to keep on assassinating.
Had no idea who this guy was but just enjoyed a few of his videos. His fake accent comes and goes, but very entertaining nonetheless!