Jump to content

Talk:Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ferret (talk | contribs) at 13:42, 9 November 2011 (→eBay). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconVideo games C‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game
CThis article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Invasion of England?

I don't think England is invaded in the game, but rather an attempted terrorist attack occurs there. Just thought I ought to clarify that. Grieferhate (talk) 12:47, 19 September 2011 (UTC) Also, should this not be the United Kingdom??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.160.41.6 (talk) 20:23, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

well it depends whether you play in England or the whole of the united kingdom. i doubt any missions will occur in scotland, wales or NI so England is probably correct.

Well France, Germany and the U.S are invaded i doubt England wouldn't be invaded to 50.98.122.61 (talk) 00:46, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

System requirements?

CPU: Core 2 Duo 2.4 GHz / Athlon 64 X2 4400+ Grahpic: Geforece 8800+ / Radeon X1800 Series RAM: 2GB+ (4GB rec.) DirectX: 9 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Balamba 500 (talk • contribs) 12:17, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have to provide a source (URL). —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 10:11, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

60 FPS!?

I'd like to request that the second sentence be removed from the Gameplay section, as it's out of context. ("It will run at 60 frames per second, minimum."). It refers to the PS3 version, and in the context of a videogame the statement makes no sense. 98.14.81.78 (talk) 05:05, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It should still be included, be reworded. It's not exactly surprising it'll run at 60 fps, considering Mw2 did the same (back on the PS3 anyway) It should say something like "the Playstatoin 3 version will be capable of 60 frames per second". Oh, and what's with the "minimum" part at the end of it? Pretty sure it can't get much more powerful than 60 fps. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.251.105.15 (talk) 01:19, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]


It will only run @60fps in Consoles because the settings are preset and rendered at lowered resolutions than PCs (720p to be exact) using the same hardware, but rendered @1080p, it will not be able to achieve the same 60fps. Given a much weaker hardware or older hardware on PCs, it will not run @ 60fps as well. not to mention PC versions are able to be rendered at resolutions higher than 720p, (eg. 1080p and 1600p) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greghome (talk • contribs) 15:21, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from , 14 October 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} In the Call of Duty: Modern Warefare 3 Wiki page, a Delta soldier should not be described as an "operative". The term operative is reserved for agents of the CIA or paramilitary forces. A man who was in Delta Force, and wrote a book on it(Eric Haney) specifically says that Delta men can't be called operatives or agents, because those have to do with the federal or clandestine parts of the government. "Operator" is the correct term for Teir 1 personnel and certain Teir 2. So Navy SEALs, DEVGRU members, and Delta soldiers should be, and are referred to in actuality as "Operators", not operatives.

Operator Spook (talk) 05:33, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Surely, a fictional game can call things anything they want? I just played an online game where 100 feet-high mushrooms destroyed a city. If you want to make a change to this article, you'll need to show reliable sources that support whatever facts you intend to add.  Chzz  ►  06:15, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done

3 not 2

Online somewhere I saw that MW3 has a 3 player Co-Op....Dose it really? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.99.64.216 (talk) 18:50, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What are you talking about, sir/mam? If you want to discuss a general topic of Modern Warfare 3, that has nothing to do with improving the article, then remember that Wikipedia is WP:NOTAFORUM. If that is not the case, can you be a little specific on your question and its relevance to the article? Thanks. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 19:51, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ratings?

Do we have any sources for the ratings? The rating for Modern Warfare 3 is not even on the PEGI website. 92.13.247.49 (talk) 16:06, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

all ratings are now up other than the BBFC, but they have announced it as an 18, containing strong bloody battle violence — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.8.126.70 (talk) 21:29, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

BF3 Trade in?

Should you include the thing where if you trade in BF3 to Gamestop, you can buy MW3 for a dollar (only in UK I believe) under marketing?

http://www.qj.net/pc-gaming/genre/trade-in-battlefield-3-get-modern-warfare-3-for-1.html I found this article on it but IDK if it constitutes a valid source etc. Someone else do it plox. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.174.93.25 (talk) 02:12, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

the decisions of one retailer should not be included, especially as it isnt a major retailer it is not really relevant (game, gamestation, asda, tesco, sainsburys are the main UK retailers for games). also i doubt this source is valid, this is not the retailers website, its just like a forum or something. also i think adding this in would not add anything to the article, apart from advertising gamestop UK — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.20.201.105 (talk) 13:37, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sandman actor

Edits were made today to a Wikia for MW3, as well as this article, and the William Fichtner article, stating that he is voicing Sandman. This conflicts with the IDBM list of voice actors, and does not appear on Fichtner's IDBM. The reference being used it a youtube video where Fichtner is revealed to be voicing a character, however the video apparently does not state which character and Fichtner's article simply stated "Unknown". An interview WITH Fichtner described him as voicing Sandman, however. IGN posted the article, but as it was an interview with the actor would it count as reliable?

I don't know if the video and interview trump IDBM, but having looked into it some, I think it needs resolved. Every source I found for Meloni seems to be referencing IDBM, with no interviews or announcements. ferret (talk) 17:35, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

IMDB is not a qualified source for the material, so with that I would say the video and interview have the trump card and should be used as a source untill a better one can be found. Is it not in the credits for the gameBeefcake6412 (talk) 17:55, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I couldn't find an actual list of credits, since the game won't be released for a few more days. ferret (talk) 17:58, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from , 8 November 2011

Ign gave MW3 a leaked review of 9/10

24.26.215.169 (talk) 03:36, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.--Hallows AG (talk) 07:59, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from , 8 November 2011

Joystiq rated it a 4.5/5.

75.108.232.117 (talk) 09:49, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done Provide a source, and request the edit again. CTJF83 17:49, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

IGN review

how can this even be included? it was done before the game had been released, so how can they praise the multiplayer when no one is online to play it? it is clearly a fake review by IGN from pressure/bribes from activision. i dont think it should be included in the article as it is so clearly biased. take it out and replace it with real reviews please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.20.201.105 (talk) 12:18, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's common for reviewers to have early copies, and they're often allowed to play together or with the developers. In short, no to your request. IGN is a reliable source, and it wouldn't be removed because your opinion is they were bought off. ferret (talk) 12:26, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]


The professional reviewers getting it earlier is no surprise, but the problem seems to be that the professional reviewers seem to have been paid to write what they have written. They have been complaining about all the endless lack of innovation in other games and given them poor ratings because of this, and yet this game that lacks so little change in graphics and gameplay, gets such a perfect review ? im puzzled. not to mention the average user rating of only 1.4/10 on sites like metacritic, with only 6 out of 48 users giving it a positive rating, and 4 having mixed thoughts about it, plus 38 people that has rated it below 4/10.

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/call-of-duty-modern-warfare-3 --Greghome (talk) 15:27, 8 November 2011 (UTC)Greg[reply]

Do you have a source that backs up a claim that the reviewers have been paid? It "seems like" is not something we can include in the article. Keep in mind as well that the IGN review was for an XBOX 360 copy, not a PC copy. User reviews also do not reflect truthfulness and cannot be verified that the user leaving the review even played the game. For example, large numbers of PC gamers left negative feedback for MW2, over the removal of dedicated servers, as a form of boycott without playing or buying the game. As a reliable source, unless discovered and published by another source, we trust that IGN has actually played the game. Until such time that there's evidence that IGN is faking reviews, it is a valid review. ferret (talk) 17:24, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Leaked copies

I know it says that some early copies were put up on ebay and some cost $1,500, but I'd like to add that one copy *sold* for $1,725 on ebay. Source: IGN and several other websites, http://ps3.ign.com/articles/121/1211626p1.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.84.91.6 (talk) 13:58, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User & Critic Reviews

I'll just leave these here, as per the reception of the game from the eyes of the gamers and critics

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/call-of-duty-modern-warfare-3

http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-3/call-of-duty-modern-warfare-3

http://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-360/call-of-duty-modern-warfare-3

http://www.metacritic.com/game/wii/call-of-duty-modern-warfare-3

http://www.metacritic.com/game/ds/call-of-duty-modern-warfare-3-defiance

78.160.10.147 (talk) 18:57, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It never ceases to amuse me that Wikipedia's standard for a game's "Reception" entry is several paragraphs reflecting critic reviews and at most a single sentence about user response.

Not like this is an industry notorious for having paid-off critics, or anything.

probably important to note; user score on metacritic is 1.4/10 for PC, while XBOX is at about 2.5/10. large criticism about un-originality from a few sources, mostly independent reviews rather than paid writers. also kinda agree with IGN effectively being ignored. tend to be uninformed/biased in most things i've seen em do.... i'd simply suggest looking on say user reviews on gamespot or metacritic, also important to state the difference between PC and console scores (console scores tend to be higher *cough low standards cough*) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.29.12.14 (talk) 22:58, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So Yeah... I somebody going to write a sentence or two about user reception? 178.191.249.132 (talk) 23:11, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Pretty sure the 500 0's given by users are just as biased as the high scores of the critics. Superman hardly deserves a 0 much less Call of Duty. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.187.10.173 (talk) 02:02, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Even if this game completely rocked the hell out of gaming, I doubt the score would have gone above four in the user ratings. Seriously, the ratings are so skewered with both critics and the fans that neither are reasonable...but I tend to agree with critics more so than I agree with users, especially since I know personally several of those full blown zeroes and not one has even *played* the game. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.196.167.250 (talk) 08:15, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

japanese release

I've modified the Japanese release part some days ago but somebody didn't allow any single change. Please make sentences from "In Japan, Square Enix will handle..." more formal and compact, and add reference like I did in this diff[1](The moving was wrong so it don't have to be moved) I can't edit it myself because I'm afraid it will be reverted again. red_romanov (talk) 19:01, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from , 9 November 2011

I think a couple of changes might be required to the voice casting bit of this article. The article claims that the character 'Truck' is voiced by Troy Baker but this is incorrect - Troy Baker actually voices the character of 'Grunt' (which is on Troy Bakers personal Wikipedia page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troy_Baker)). The character of 'Truck' is voiced by Idris Elba although I am having trouble finding a source to confirm this. I can confirm, however, that Idris Elba is in the credits at the end of the game under voice artists. 90.218.204.99 (talk) 00:16, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Iris Elba is Truck's voice actor

Please change this as soon as possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.28.169.195 (talk) 00:18, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

eBay

"Copies for more than US$1,500 have appeared for bid on eBay." This does not sound dramatic enough. If I put one on eBay for $1,000,000 can I update this or or would that count as OR? Kwenchin (talk) 05:41, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's notable, to be honest. Undue weight. ferret (talk) 13:42, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from , 9 November 2011

The reference to the site Metacritic is misleading. The reference claims a score of 9.0 but on the site it is clearly visible that the game is not received well by the community (a score of 2.6).

It should in my opinion not link to: http://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-360/call-of-duty-modern-warfare-3/critic-reviews but to: http://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-360/call-of-duty-modern-warfare-3 and reflect the user score or at least a remark in the review commentary.

This to maintain objectivity for this subject. No personal motivation apart from misleading information on Wikipedia.

Propereditor (talk) 07:25, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The user reviews have no use for Wikipedia's standards. Unless a reliable source comments on the fact that the user reviews are so low. Plus, none of those people know what they are talking about. It happens all the time with sequels. Silly fanboys wanted more, and didn't get it, so they rage. It has only been a day an a half(not counting the few people who got it early somehow). Let more reviews come in and balance it out. Blake (Talk·Edits) 13:06, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reviews template

I pulled this back up out of the history of the article. I understand why Gary is removing it, as the template states to only fill in scores that are used within the prose of the Reception section. However, someone took the effort to source all of the scores, so I wanted to throw the full template back up on the talk page so people would have the sources to work with and build into the Reception, which currently is tagged for expansion. I set it to collapsed to avoid messing with the talk page too much. ferret (talk) 13:41, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ "Call of Duty: Black Ops for PS3 – GameRankings". Gamerankings. 2011-11-08. Retrieved 2011-11-08.
  2. ^ "Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 for Xbox 360 - GameRankings". GameRankings. Retrieved 2011-11-08.
  3. ^ "Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 Critic Reviews for Xbox 360 at Metacritic.com". Metacritic. Retrieved 2011-11-08.
  4. ^ "Call of Duty: Black Ops for Xbox 360 – GameRankings". Gamerankings. 2011-11-08. {{cite web}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help); Missing or empty |url= (help)
  5. ^ Cite error: The named reference ign360 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  6. ^ "Call of Duty: Black Ops for Xbox 360 – GamesRadar". GamesRadar. 2011-11-08. Retrieved 2011-11-08.
  7. ^ "Call of Duty: Black Ops for Xbox 360 – OXM". OXM. 2011-11-08. Retrieved 2011-11-08.
  8. ^ "Call of Duty: Black Ops for Xbox 360 – Gametrailers". Gametrailers. 2011-11-08. Retrieved 2011-11-08.
  9. ^ "Call of Duty: Black Ops for Xbox 360 – EGM". EGM. 2011-11-08. Retrieved 2011-11-08.
  10. ^ "Call of Duty: Black Ops for Xbox 360 – 1UP". 1up.com. 2011-11-08. Retrieved 2011-11-08.
  11. ^ "Call of Duty: Black Ops for Xbox 360 – Edge". Edge. 2011-11-08. Retrieved 2011-11-08.
  12. ^ "Call of Duty: Black Ops for Xbox 360 – Game Informer". Game Informer. 2011-11-08. Retrieved 2011-11-08.
  13. ^ "Call of Duty: Black Ops for Xbox 360 – G4". G4. 2011-11-08. Retrieved 2011-11-08.
  14. ^ "Call of Duty: Black Ops for Xbox 360 – GameSpot". GameSpot. 2011-11-08. Retrieved 2011-11-08.
  15. ^ "Call of Duty: Black Ops for Xbox 360 – GamePro". GamePro. 2011-11-08. Retrieved 2011-11-08.
  16. ^ "Call of Duty: Black Ops for Xbox 360 – Eurogamer". Eurogamer. 2011-11-08. Retrieved 2011-11-08.
  17. ^ Cite error: The named reference daily was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Call_of_Duty:_Modern_Warfare_3&oldid=459798692"