Modern Warfare 3: 'There's Lots of Innovation Here.'

[Vreki]

Re: Modern Warfare 3: 'There's Lots of Innovation Here.'

I am curios, what decides if a game belongs in the BC or BF series?
As far as I can see, Infantry combat has evolved continuously through both BC and BF, each new release building on experiences from the previous regardless of it was BF or BC.
So I don't see a need to label BF3 as a BC game just because its soldiers have things in common with BC2.

[CptainCrunch]

Re: Modern Warfare 3: 'There's Lots of Innovation Here.'

Heck no its not odd, we beat them and now we are moving on to the next guys.

Innovation does not always mean enhancements. Everyone touts "true sequal" show me where DICE said it was going to be exactly like BF2. Show me the link and I will change everything that I said about the people wanting BF2.7.

The console blaming is getting old too. Its been shown over and over how the PC has way more features and enhancements over the console versions.

Crunch

[Stryker]

Well looking at it, it's def BC3 and not BF3. It's Bad company up scaled with a more serious mood. It's the same war as BF2 yet a whole faction is gone...odd no? More was taken from BC2 than BF2. BF3 will still be a great game, but innovation for a true BF2 game should mean adding, not subtracting. (Commander, 6 man squads, etc) We held our breadth hoping for atleast 64 players and we got it, the way that we were left guessing and hoping was enough info to know it isn't a "true sequel." Imagine a PC only BF3, you can picture it and you know that BF3 is a beautiful game but gameplay wise it's missing things because of consoles.

[Anarchy1]

Re: Modern Warfare 3: 'There's Lots of Innovation Here.'

Compared to BC2, BF3 isn't that innovative.

But when the difference is compared to the difference between MW3 and MW2, it seems like the transition from the Stone Age to the Bronze Age.

[AzaleaBC]

Re: Modern Warfare 3: 'There's Lots of Innovation Here.'

Oh man look at that troll, or is it someone who is unfortunately very idiotic?

Really? What's so innovative about Battlefield 3? It looks great, I had fun playing the beta, but it's an amalgamation of BF2 and BF3. Hell, they even have Back to Karkand.

Why - well there's the 3d spotting from BC2, along with Rush and Squad Rush. Squads are the same. Add that to the tanks, helicopters and jeeps from the same game.

There will be more players though, which is what reminded me of BF2. Scaling maps based on the player count, 64 player battles, it's all well and good but aside from jets, what have we not seen before? They can't even get the netcode and an ingame server browser right! At least they gave up on the latter. I thought BattleLog worked well and it was much more accurate than a BC2 browser that apparently had a ping of 15 to Brazil (physically impossible). I know they're fixing the netcode to stamp out the seeming 1 hit kills.

tl;dr BF3 is and will be great fun but it's nothing new either.

[CptainCrunch]

Re: Modern Warfare 3: 'There's Lots of Innovation Here.'

Now lets not get insulting. There is some truth to the statement, however, there is so much whining in a lot of the other forums that what was said just cannot be confirmed.

I mean if we are really honest and take a step back and look at BF3 and compare it to BC2, what has changed? Its far less than if you look at BF3 and at BF2 and ask the same question.

And now since I said that and some will read this and go "Crunch, you hypocrite, thats not what you said in the BF3 section on BF2!" Actually, thats not true. BF3 is going to be a great game, in my opinion, because its not BF2.7. Im looking forward to it and I feel it is a TRUE battlefield series game. A lot has changed and I think its for the good.

The thing is though look at MW1 to MW2 to MW3 and what has changed, been added or adjusted?

Now look at BF2, BC2, and BF3 and what has been changed, added, or adjusted?

Big difference there.

Crunch

[k1nk0s]

Re: Modern Warfare 3: 'There's Lots of Innovation Here.'

BF hasn't innovated since BC2. Let's take BF2, make it look flashy and add jets and use the modes from BC2.

Oh man look at that troll, or is it someone who is unfortunately very idiotic?

[jimykx]

Re: Modern Warfare 3: 'There's Lots of Innovation Here.'

BF hasn't innovated since BC2. Let's take BF2, make it look flashy and add jets and use the modes from BC2.

So you are saying the gameplay, graphics and feel of the game haven't changed?

[CptainCrunch]

Re: Modern Warfare 3: 'There's Lots of Innovation Here.'

BF hasn't innovated since BC2. Let's take BF2, make it look flashy and add jets and use the modes from BC2.

Do you think that or do you think Battlefield is dead and this is Bad Company 3?

When you read the EA and Battlelog forums, many "veterans" say that too much has changed and Battlefield is dead. Seems a bit extreme for somethign that was just made flashy.

Crunch

[AzaleaBC]

BF hasn't innovated since BC2. Let's take BF2, make it look flashy and add jets and use the modes from BC2.

[Eagle101]

um...lulz.

[Stryker]

"We've got the XM25, which is a grenade launcher that's just being used right now. It's got a laser target. Let's say somebody's hiding behind a rock, you laser the rock, aim a metre above it and it blows everything up below." noob tube innovation?"We're using nine bangs.' We've got the dual scope, so you can switch between an EOtech and a red dot sight really quickly. It's so........................."Terminator! "With multiplayer we've added Strike Packages. So you've got Assault, Support and Specialist, and that in itself allows you to customise the way you want to play. You're going to get rewarded for being a team player now, for destroying objectives and things like that."You mean it's trying to be like BF3 now....

[The_Eliminator]

So their idea of innovation is more scopes and a grenade launcher? GOOD STUFF GUYS!

[Anarchy1]

Re: Modern Warfare 3: 'There's Lots of Innovation Here.'

I'm thinking that his idea of innovation is very strange.

[CptainCrunch]

This is a part one interview at computersandvideogames.com:

Modern Warfare arrives in less than a month on November 8. Ahead of the release of what's in all likelihood going to be the biggest entertainment launch of the year, we sat down for a chat with Glen Schofield, general manager and co-founder of Sledgehammer Games, the new Activision studio initially formed to take the series in a fresh direction.

Things didn't turn out as originally planned though, as staff departures at series creator Infinity Ward resulted in Sledgehammer taking on Modern Warfare 3 co-development duties. In part one of our interview, former EA Visceral Games GM and Dead Space executive producer Schofield explains how the unlikely marriage with Infinity Ward came about, and how gameplay innovations will make Modern Warfare 3 the most accessible Call of Duty game yet.

What stage of development was Infinity Ward at when Sledgehammer became attached to Modern Warfare 3 as co-developer?

Well they hadn't kicked off, they were about to kick off. They knew they had to get started on it but they had personnel issues, so before they could get started and feel confident they were going to make the game, they needed another team to help them out.

What were the core design principles for the single player campaign?

Basically, we sat down, talked to each other and one of the things we came out and said was: 'We want to tell a story. We want to tell a good story, we don't want it to be confusing, I want to know who I'm playing.' We came in and said here are some of the things, as a fan that we believe should be corrected. And they were pretty much like, 'You're speaking to the choir. We agree.' So that was like a big touchdown, first day, goal. So here's a big win on day one, sort of agreeing that we need to do that. There were so many things that we were agreeing on in the first few days of meeting and talking.

You said the game's going to wrap up the first two Modern Warfare titles nicely. Is the Modern Warfare series designed as a trilogy?

No. No, it's not a trilogy. The idea was that the other two were left on cliff-hangers - doing it again felt wrong. As a matter of fact, it was like, we just escalated this thing from the first game to the third game to World War Three. We could leave it hanging, or we could do an Iron Man and wrap it up. You feel good, you know. Is there a glimmer of something that says the series isn't done, if we wanted it that way? Yeah, but not in terms of a cliff-hanger, more in terms of the universe has blown up, if that makes sense.

Can you say how long the single player campaign lasts?

I don't know.

Compared to the other games?

I've played each level four to five hundred times. You're just playing it and playing it, and I've been playing it since it was just boxes. So I don't know. All I can tell you is that from a design point of view, we sit down and write a story. We don't ever say 'Write a five hour story,' we just write a really great story, and at the end of the day if it comes out and it feels too short, we don't want to just add stuff. With that said, I don't think it's too short. It feels like a great story. The right amount of time. You and I are going to play it at different speeds.

Do you have any data on the percentage of players who complete the single player campaigns?

I don't know if we have scientific data, but I know that people have talked to me about it and have said it's pretty 50/50. One of the big differences is that we had numbers at EA... like 50 percent of the people that played a game, you know, went to level three, but finishing the game, like ten percent. One of the things I heard with Call of Duty: Modern Warfare is that when people start playing single-player they'll finish it. I think this is sort of a testament to the good ramp in gameplay and the excitement of continuing.

Lack of innovation is a criticism often levelled at Call of Duty. Can you tell us how this game innovates and builds on past games in the series?

Well for this game I think there's a lot. Let's start with the single player campaign, the story itself. We spent a lot of time on it, there's some great stuff in there, the character development, some great dialogue. That's not innovative in itself but I think it's new for the series. We go to these huge urban environments now, we have different types of battles going on. We're in cities, we're fighting with other people and with different groups, we're changing the pace of things.

And we've absolutely got new mechanics. We've got the XM25, which is a grenade launcher that's just being used right now. It's got a laser target. Let's say somebody's hiding behind a rock, you laser the rock, aim a metre above it and it blows everything up below. We're using a nine-bang instead of a flash-bang. That came right from Delta. They said 'We're not using flash bangs. We haven't been using flash bangs for years. We're using nine bangs.' We've got the dual scope, so you can switch between an EOtech and a red dot sight really quickly. It's so convenient.

There's also stuff I can't talk about. There's so much. The big moments are bigger than they ever were. We've got a new audio engine. We've upgraded the audio engine. You're hearing whizzes, bangs, which way they're coming from, how far they are. The sound is all around you, we really, really upgraded that.

With multiplayer we've added Strike Packages. So you've got Assault, Support and Specialist, and that in itself allows you to customise the way you want to play. You're going to get rewarded for being a team player now, for destroying objectives and things like that. We've also added Weapon Proficiency. You can add attributes to your weapons. You can upgrade your weapons to take out some of the sway, some of the kick, so you can hold your breath while holding an assault rifle in ADS (aim down sights) and so on and so on. The more you use it, the more it's upgraded.

We've got new modes like Kill Confirmed and a bunch of other things; we've got dedicated servers. Also, Spec-Ops Survival mode is a major, major addition to the game. It's huge, we just added infinite amount of time. You can play forever. We've brought in the leaderboard system and all the upgrades which you saw and played.

You can imagine now that one of the things we did consciously was to use the levels in multiplayer and put them in Survival mode. That was to try and create this bridge so that people who do play single player, who are maybe a little intimidated by multiplayer, will sit down with a buddy and play co-op and go 'wow, that's cool. I'm really getting to know this level. I get the upgrade system now, I get it all.' And then they could jump into multiplayer.

So it's a more accessible Call of Duty than ever before?

Absolutely. Then if you think about adding Call of Duty Elite to it, if you want to jump into multiplayer after you learn Spec-Ops and just use your friends list to play, then you're given a higher level of comfort. It's one of the things we've been hearing: 'I don't want to jump into a game with a bunch of teenagers and get trash-talked all the time. I want to actually have fun and get in there.' And a lot of people like that type of gameplay, but we're trying to make it so you can customise it for yourself.

Keep an eye out for part two of our interview, to be published shortly, in which Schofield discusses criticism of the Call of Duty game engine, review score, sales targets and Battlefield 3.

I was going to post a few comments about this article, but I think I will let you all tell me what you think that I am thinking and then I will post what I felt when I read this.
+Rep for those that read my mind.

I can't wait to read part two!

Source