I hope by now everyone has come to realise that there are two major games from two of the biggest companies in the industry. Battlefield 3 from EA games, developed by Dice and Modern Warfare 3 from Activision, developed by Infinity Ward and Sledgehammer Games. Both companies battling it on head 2 head with their words and showing off all the new features.
There is no doubt that Modern Warfare 3 has seen less of a change from its predecessor but continues to sell a lot. This is why Activision has an annual release for Call of Duty games. Battlefield 3 however has had a complete revamp of its game engine and has added a ton of new features. Modern Warfare 3 might be in trouble this year with Battlefield 3 coming out same time.
We all know that Battlefield 3 will succeed and will sell a lot compared to its predecessors; but is this a good thing? [TacticZone]
Battlefield 3's former Lead Designer has revealed that there were two cut missions from the main campaign
Get rid of campaigns, move the game to mobile, and try to compete with warzone. They would save time and money.
Free for Playstation owners
Players are using hacks to gain an advantage in the game, such as aimbots and wall hacks. The first gives a player superhuman aiming abilities, while a wall hack lets you see through walls to gauge where other players are.
“These hacks are typically used by PC players, but those playing on PC via Xbox Game Pass are identified as Xbox players in multiplayer lobbies.”
This is pretty dumb to say the least.
That's a WTF, they suppose to be labeled as pc users even if its on PC game pass. They mess that up big time.
If AI keeps getting better (and it will) it's just a matter of time before there's more sophisticated cheats even for consoles, and they wouldn't even need to be running on it, I have little doubt about that.
Don't Gamepass online games have anti-cheat systems?
If not, that's pretty dumb. Microsoft need to fix that asap.
They won't ever fix this problem, unless they (developers, publishers, Sony and MS) go after the cheat providers directly. You no longer need to hack consoles to use hacks. During the ps360 days, they were going after cheat devices, but it was a cat and mouse game. These cheating methods were around during those days, it's nothing new, but they kept it under control. Since the PS4/Xbox one generation, they stopped going after these cheating devices and it became widespread. Which I find odd, since they started charging for online play (PS4).
Possibly, this is because the companies were going after cheats because the same cheats were being used to pirate the games, whereas today, the companies use online verification to prevent piracy, thus eliminating the need to go after people who cheat only to gain an advantage in the game. As long as the cheater remains below the radar, and does not completely break the game, the companies look the other way as their wallets are not threatened by it. (that is my completely Uneducated opinion on the matter)
I mean, COD games was always filled with hackers, nothing new. I can’t blame MS on this. Activision had years to try and fix this. Might take MS some time to make some change.
It all depends…
Microsoft’s guidance on how to handle gamepass on pc and their love to force crossplay with pc seems like a them issue.
And they own activision, so it is still a them issue.
Erm I'm not sure this the write notices the last full battlefield title was ages years and years ago and bad company is almost like a spin off series and also 3 was made to cater to new hardware hence the new engine why is this seen as a downfall =/
Modern Warfare is a franchise based on city combat that is fast paced and easy to approach. You don't have overly advanced elements but a quite straigthforward set of weapons and equipment along with some perks to improve your performance.
Battlefield is focusing on a veichular strategy, with Jets, Tanks & destruction. You have a wide range of classes with each own "objective" rather than each individual being the same type of soldier.
There is alot of differences between the two and I honestly do not see why the Battlefield community has a hatred towards Modern Warfare. I keep hearing complaints of the 12 year old Xbox players that scream in their microphones, but I would rather listen to that than play with the so called "mature BF community" that raise their voice on these boards.
The engine might not be a top notch newly developed beast as Frostbite 2 is, yet it is still optimized for each new game. Call of Duty and Modern Warfare has never been the graphical dominant of the FPS genre and that won't change. Instead of going with great graphics and a locked 30 FPS, Infinity Ward/Sledgehammer/Raven Software focuses on a 60FPS minimum smooth, fast paced shooter that is easy to approach for their main targetgroup, the casuals.
People seem to forget that Activision is a company that runs a business. Their focus is to maximize revenue and appeal to as many people as possible. Both the Call of Duty and Modern Warfare franchise has proven to succeed on both these focuses. They sell better than any other FPS and they appeal to more than any other FPS.
Rather than trying to win over CoD & MW players by slaughtering the engine and Activision (which clearly haven't worked the past three titles) - The BF community should try and sell their product with it's unique features that CoD & MW cannot offer.
Each and every time a Modern Warfare 3 story reaches N4G, the BF community rushes to it and takes aim at every negative thing they can find. It's quite disgusting to see people who are not interested in the game feel the need to curse and act like children.
Hope they don't start releasing one every year.
2142 though? I'd like that again.
NOTE:
I made this mistake with an article of mine..... but that is a picture of SOCOM ;P
No, but I think the Hype that EA tries to make it sound like it's the next biggest thing since sliced bread.
I wish I had a top of the line PC to play this beast, but not worth the money for this one game.