• SSTF@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    The article says that early reviews are let down by the campaign. Egregious asset reuse on a rushed campaign.

    I know a lot of people don’t care about campaigns in COD, but I do. Once a game’s one year MP cycle is over, all that’s really left is the campaign.

    The asset reuse in the campaign doesn’t bode well for multiplayer either, since that means more than likely obvious asset reuse there too. Which makes the whole thing look and feel like an overgrown, overpriced DLC, which is apparently what it is.

    FWIW I played all console/PC CODs from the very first game to the first Modern Warfare reboot (except for Black Ops 3). Lot of highs and lows in the series, but each game had something to memorably set it apart. MW3 seems to have nothing to draw people in.

      • 𝔼𝕩𝕦𝕤𝕚𝕒@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 years ago

        It’s a fuckin abuse of hard drives.

        The map is all on the Warzone map. Shit you not. Watched Charlie confirm it - if you’ve played warzone you’ve seen every locale in mw3, with obvious differences in set pieces like cars and signage.