Why MW2 is better than MW3 (a few items).

#1 Edited by ParchedThroatCottonMouth (14 posts) -

Let's get right to it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJOpFCCnv0E - This isn't me, but I wish that my voice was this creepy to keep most of these women away from me.

1. MW3 Lag Compensation

What it does: Causes the game to be played in slo-mo to compensate for slower connections. Makes the game unbearably slow and unplayable.

2. MW3 'Sticky Bullets'

What it is: Bullets home in on your targets and stick to them. Larger, 'stickier' hitboxes. Guns are given priority over player movement.

3. Nerfed Abilities

Real Talk: You name it, what ability from MW2 isn't as effective in MW3? Frustrating.

4. 'Zombie' Following

Truth: Unfortunately, MW3 is the 'flavor of the month' right now. No one will really send a message by straying away from this game because everyone and their friend's mother's cousin's aunt's pet babysitter is playing it.

What do YOU think? What other glaring issue(s) have you encountered with MW3 that makes MW2 seem like a better game?

#2 Posted by Jack268 (3387 posts) -

The sticky bullets has been in every console Call of Duty game, I don't even understand what your 3rd point is, and 4 is basically "WAAH WAHH THIS GAME IS SO MAINSTREAM"

#3 Posted by Hunkulese (2723 posts) -

@ParchedThroatCottonMouth: If you haven't been paying attention Call of Duty has been the flavor of the month going on about 48 months now.

Online
#4 Posted by awesomeusername (4185 posts) -
@Hunkulese: 48 months? Don't you mean 4 years? /sarcasm
#5 Posted by ParchedThroatCottonMouth (14 posts) -

@Jack268: For example, let's say, the running in MW3. It seems so much slower and in much shorter bursts. Just one example there.

@Hunkulese: Let's keep this current, and not long-term backlog.

#6 Posted by TheVeteran13 (1209 posts) -

They should bring back juggernaut...

#7 Posted by eugenesaxe (199 posts) -

Haven't played MW3 because MW2 ruined FPS for me, specifically the Goddamn nuke. I'm happy playing World at War.

#8 Posted by VilhelmNielsen (1735 posts) -

Yeah, the worst thing about it is it's popular! Dumb people are dumb!

#9 Posted by Flushes (329 posts) -

The worst things about this game are that going prone still doesn't have a lengthy animation that doesn't allow you to shoot, and that quickscoping exists in any fashion. Inexcusable.

#10 Posted by kashif1 (1428 posts) -

@eugenesaxe said:

Haven't played MW3 because MW2 ruined FPS for me, specifically the Goddamn nuke. I'm happy playing World at War.

MW2 had many problems but the nuke never really felt like one of them

#11 Posted by Entreri10 (198 posts) -

Ghost (person)..im glad the nuke was taken out though.

#12 Posted by the_OFFICIAL_jAPanese_teaBAG (4308 posts) -

I see the problem of people "farming" (or whatever the term is) for nukes but I dont get why people ever had a problem with them.  I only encountered them when my team was losing by a large margin.  Whats the problem with ending the game early

#13 Posted by Hunkulese (2723 posts) -

@awesomeusername: Um what? Do I really need to explain why I chose to say 48 months?

Online
#14 Edited by SpaceInsomniac (3732 posts) -
#15 Posted by awesomeusername (4185 posts) -
@Hunkulese: I was just being stupid.
#16 Edited by ParchedThroatCottonMouth (14 posts) -
#17 Posted by eugenesaxe (199 posts) -

@kashif1: I didn't mind the nuke itself, just the lowlife turds that I always managed to find that spent the whole game boosting for nukes.

#18 Posted by Cowman (669 posts) -

@VilhelmNielsen said:

Yeah, the worst thing about it is it's popular! Dumb people are dumb!

If I can find lobbies to join it's already too mainstream for me.

#19 Posted by ParchedThroatCottonMouth (14 posts) -

I'm talking overall gameplay here, folks. Right now, MW2 is ahead. Way ahead. MW3 needs fixes ASAP.

#20 Posted by SathingtonWaltz (2053 posts) -

I haven't had the chance to play MW3, but I know how much I hated the endless stream of shit that was MW2 multiplayer. If you like balanced games, then MW2 wasn't one of them.

#21 Posted by CandiBunni (465 posts) -

@ParchedThroatCottonMouth said:

I'm talking overall gameplay here, folks. Right now, MW2 is ahead. Way ahead. MW3 needs fixes ASAP.

What kinds of fixes? Half or so of what you stated in your original post has been countered by people who have posted in the thread. I've not played either of them (looking forward to playing MW3, though), so I'd like to know what else (if anything) needs to be fixed in MW3. Also, besides the few reasons you gave above, how is MW2 ahead of MW3? I'd also like to know that.

#22 Posted by ParchedThroatCottonMouth (14 posts) -

@CandiBunni: Creepy voice guy sounds off: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJOpFCCnv0E

MW2 feels much smoother. Among several other things, MW3 is a lagfest and was not balanced correctly coming off of MW2. MW3 is a lot slower and more punishing than MW2. MW2 is much faster and less punishing than MW3.

#23 Posted by OneManX (1693 posts) -

Akimbo Shotguns... Fuck MW2

#24 Posted by Yanngc33 (4496 posts) -

Not giving a shit, I can state that MW 2 did not have a scene where an annoying child was blown to bits. I hate children, especially the ones who enjoy running around and yelling, MW 3 wins by a mile

#25 Posted by DeanoXD (608 posts) -

sticky bullets, sticky bullets? i call bullshit because i can't get my bullets to stick to anyone :)

#26 Posted by MentalDisruption (1635 posts) -

Number 3 sounds like a good thing if you ask me.

@DeanoXD: Try the guerrilla glue accessory. Slaps a big old bottle on your gun for easy use.

#27 Posted by DeanoXD (608 posts) -

@MentalDisruption: god dammit, let me guess this is a elite perk isn't, isn't! What bullshit

In all fairness i have managed to get to LVL 70 in MW3 as a very average support player.

#28 Posted by blake_brown (117 posts) -

@ParchedThroatCottonMouth:

1. I have not experienced this, nor have I had any other lag issues.

2. This has always been the case in CoD, it's irritating but you learn to deal with it if you enjoy these games.

3. I think MW3 is by far the most balanced of all the CoD multiplayer suites.

4. While it lacks in some areas, I think it is by far the most well-honed gameplay experience of the series.

MW2 had a better, more interesting campaign. However, MW3's multiplayer features are better by far. The maps and weapons are incredibly well-balanced in comparison to Black Ops or MW2 (ie. no noobtube-ing, not as much claymore usage, no overpowered shotguns) and Spec-Ops is noteworthy (would have been perfect if they allowed 4 players in Survival mode).

I think this is the peak for the series, I doubt anything Treyarch does will improve upon this game.

#29 Posted by Nux (2360 posts) -

Didn't we have this thread already?

#30 Posted by themangalist (1735 posts) -

This lag compensation thing is new to me. Haven't played multiplayer competitively since Halo:CE (well maybe Battlefield 3 but whatever). This is crazy shit. Thanks OP for reminding me why I would play skyrim more than any fps shooter online nowadays.

#31 Posted by Sitoxity (551 posts) -

The only thing I feel MW3 multiplayer does less than good is the map design. I feel that the map designs aren't as memorable as Black Ops or WAW and just don't seem as up to scratch as the previous two MW either. Only a couple stick out to me as good, where the rest are pretty much garbage. Sure, it's nice having so many maps to play, but when most of them suck, it's hardly a bonus.

#32 Posted by Twisted_Scot (1177 posts) -

Seems like after MW2 hit the COD community was split down the middle:

1) Those that like the small mapped, over-the-top, fast paced, sprint & spray game style of the MW games (IW, sledgehammer etc)

2) Those that like the larger maps, slightly less frantic, more realistic (realistic is a bad term to use but cant really describe what I'm getting at with another word so don't start!) style of the Treyach Black Ops game.

I like COD games but HATE MW3 as it seems to completely tailor to the 1st set of players now 100%. Weird thing is am actually pretty happy about it (OK pissed I bought MW3 but except from that). I like the idea that I will now only buy COD every 2 years assuming that I still enjoy the Treyarch releases. As long as the companies support the game until their next one is released I'm fine with buying a COD game every 2nd year. Just means that every style of COD player may get a game they enjoy without getting as tired of the same thing every year.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.