• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Call of Duty XP 2016 Sept. 2-4 (Infinite Warfare MP Reveal)

They're not bringing back Extinction? Dang that was one of my favorite things about Ghosts; oh well they have space combat so I'll get over it quick. I wonder if space combat will be restricted to single player only or they'll have space specific multiplayer modes?
 
I bought the season pass, that's the issue. I always go back to the old games anyway but with COD4 remastered weeks away? Forget it.
I understand. I buy season passes for my favorite titles even though I probably shouldn't since they are a rip off. A few maps for the price of a full game.

DLC and Microtransaction prices are ridiculous. COD isn't the only game that is guilty of this.

Absolutely ridiculous the way they have handled this franchise the past few years. It used to be a favorite of mine and all they have done is made me bitter.
 

legacyzero

Banned
If they wanna add microtransactions- cool.

Give DLC maps free. Otherwise, fuck outta here.

lmao the hate is strong here ,

I only care about Black Ops 3 DLC 4 , last zombie map will be epic ¡¡¡¡
I used to love the zombies mode so much. Now its just become a convoluted chore, where, to me, it should just be about survival like the old days.

If this game takes place in the future, then why the Hell are we still fighting zombies? You would think with all the technology that this would have been wiped out or been replaced by a more menacing threat like a robot uprising.
I gotta give credit to Advanced Warfare on this one. They handled Zombies way better than Treyarch did.
 

Calm Mind

Member
If this game takes place in the future, then why the Hell are we still fighting zombies? You would think with all the technology that this would have been wiped out or been replaced by a more menacing threat like a robot uprising.
 

kuYuri

Member
I would say "like usual" but unfortunately, it's a step back from Black Ops 3, which revealed both single player and multiplayer at E3, which was the right decision. Also the beta was in late august, but many people could see how BO3 would look like in MP way before on Youtube.

Infinity Ward/Activision aren't confident at all to show the MP of Infinite Warfare, and meanwhile Battlefield 1 will build even more appeal as they will reveal their MP this E3.

Also that means no beta until at least the end of CoD XP. Surely late september or early october.

Except for the fact that this thread is about a big event in which they are going to debut the MP for the game? Lol, this post makes no sense.

Just because they are showing it a little later than BO3's reveal means nothing. BO3 was the exception, not the rule. Every other CoD MP reveal was typically around August/September.
 

test_account

XP-39C²
Oh its a certainty.

Its just unfortunate that they want to split the community so bad.
Yeah, it sucks for those who primarily, or only wants COD4, i can see that. Business wise, i guess that Activision sees it as too risky move to release a $20 or $30 competitior (even if its an "old game") to the main game on the same day.


I do value Infinite Warfare at zero because I don't want to play it, which makes COD4 cost €84 (cheapest legacy edition in Finland right now) which is total bullshit and I'm not paying that much for a remastered old game with half of the content missing.
Sure, but if you value COD4 something, then its not a $80 paywall. I just wanted to comment on that =) You can always sell Infinite Warfare if you have no interest in it. Maybe some extra work, but at least it will bring the price down for COD4. Otherwise its best to wait for the standalone release.
 

KC Denton

Member
If this game takes place in the future, then why the Hell are we still fighting zombies? You would think with all the technology that this would have been wiped out or been replaced by a more menacing threat like a robot uprising.
Usually the zombies mode takes place in the past, like how Black Ops 2 zombies is set in the 30s and Black Ops 3 is set in the 40s. I'd assume this game will follow suit.
 

geordiemp

Member
Every weapons have their advantages and disadvantages. The Marshal 16 is powerful, but has poor range and slow reload. Other secondary weapons have an advantage in those fields..

Secondary weapons are short range, and Marshall is OP as hell (and yes at master level 400 +, almost 70,000 kills, 2.5 KD, I kinda know this). The only counter is another shotgun (primary)...Maybe you know better, but I dont come across many who played as much as me period.

Dont get me started on dual crossbow spam. And yes, with so much time played I had half the DLC guns anyway but I could not support this shit anymore.

Anyway, I bought Bo3 digitally with season pass, like I do every year, Activision shat on me and I felt cheated, I will move to Battlefield this year.

Only If numbers go down will activision halt the pay 2 win onslaught that has begun.
 

test_account

XP-39C²
Secondary weapons are short range, and Marshall is OP as hell (and yes at master level 400 +, almost 70,000 kills, 2.5 KD, I kinda know this). The only counter is another shotgun (primary)...Maybe you know better, but I dont come across many who played as much as me period.

Dont get me started on dual crossbow spam. And yes, with so much time played I had half the DLC guns anyway but I could not support this shit anymore.

Anyway, I bought Bo3 digitally with season pass, like I do every year, Activision shat on me and I felt cheated, I will move to Battlefield this year.

Only If numbers go down will activision halt the pay 2 win onslaught that has begun.

Yes, but the other secondary weapons have longer range and faster reload. The Marshal 16 has an advantage when it comes to power, definitelly, but at the same time, it has disadvantages in range and reload speed. If you miss or are a bit out of range, you might be fucked due to the slower reload speed. I just feel that its not really that much of an advantage. Depends on which type of situation you're in. I havnt played BO3 as much as you (i think i got something between 10k-15k kills and i'm at 8th or 9th prestige (been a while since i last played it)), but i did get the Marshal 16 in a drop, so i have checked it out myself.

EDIT: Not sure about the crossbow, cant remember if i unlocked that or not. I did unlock that MP-40 SMG variant though. Cool weapon, but i didnt feel any big advantages with it.
 

geordiemp

Member
Yes, but the other secondary weapons have longer range and faster reload. The Marshal 16 has an advantage when it comes to power, definitelly, but at the same time, it has disadvantages in range and reload speed. If you miss or are a bit out of range, you might be fucked due to the slow reload speed. I just feel that its not really that much of an advantage. Depends on which type of situation you're in.

No, you enter a room, you know its size, you switch to a Marshall, you either win or take down the first guy. No other gun can do that. Its broken, as is the NX dual wield crossbow (and yes I have it but dont use it as it pisses people off).

The garand was OP at launch (OP silenced range) but they nerfed it (I remember bombing Vandahaar tweets #p2w until they did).

Anyway, I wont support this shit in this or any other game, its a fucking terrible way to treat your fanbase and they know it, luckily they have COD 4 to save their sales I can really see a backlash.

I bet infinite Warfare does not sell season passes this year.
 

test_account

XP-39C²
No, you enter a room, you know its size, you switch to a Marshall, you either win or take down the first guy. No other gun can do that. Its broken, as is the NX dual wield crossbow (and yes I have it but dont use it as it pisses people off).

The garand was OP at launch (OP silenced range) but they nerfed it (I remember bombing Vandahaar tweets #p2w until they did).

Anyway, I wont support this shit in this or any other game, its a fucking terrible way to treat your fanbase and they know it.
Yes, it depends on what type of situation you're in. Here you're describing one situation with a smaller room. It also depends on if you're playing standard or Hardcore mode. I used to play quite a bit on Hardcore using the RK5 when going for the 1000 pistol kills challenge. I could take down people from a good distance, the Marshal 16 cant do that.

But like i said, if you feel that the crate drop weapons are a big advantages, thats fine of course. I'm just saying that i personally dont feel that way from my experience.
 

geordiemp

Member
Yes, it depends on what type of situation you're in. Here you're describing one situation with a smaller room.

It also depends on if you're playing standard or Hardcore mode. I used to play quite a bit on Hardcore using the RK5. I could take down people from a good distance, the Marshal 16 cant do that.

LOL all normal guns are good in hardcore (who shoots first). Did you do dark matter ? If you did you would of used all hand cannons in hardcore..(min damage 22 x 1.5 lol)......I could snipe people across the map with Mr6 with high calibre, so what, it has nothing to do with core game balance.

Dark matter is 100 headshot kills with every weapon in the game, and then challenges like getting a number of 5 killstreaks and kills without attachments / perks. You have to get good with every weapon.
 

test_account

XP-39C²
LOL all normal guns are good in hardcore (who shoots first). Did you do dark matter ? I could snipe people across the map with Mr6 with high calibre, so what, it has nothing to do with core game balance.
No, i havnt unlocked any dark matter. Never really checked into how to unlock that. I went for the 1000 kills with pistol challenge.

Yeah, you have a lot less health in Hardcore, sure, but if you see a guy 20-30 meter away from you while playing Hardcore, i doubt the Marshal 16 can take down enemies at that range while other pistols can. The same would apply in standard mode as well, so it doesnt really matter that much if its Hardcore or standard mode being played because it still depends on the situation you're in when playing the game.

Not sure what the arguement here is to be honest. Some weapons are better in certain situations and i acknowledge that the Marshal 16 is really good when being close up to the enemy, its definitelly the gun that has the highest damage stats. But you're not always in that type of situation when playing the game, so all i'm saying is that other weapons will have advantages depending on which type of situation you're in. Are you disagreeing with this? Sometimes guns can be used to take down the enemy if your primary weapon goes out of bullets, or simply switching to the gun is faster than reloading the primary weapon. Guns doesnt always have to be used in very close range. In my opinion, having weapons for different senarios is mainly what balance is about.

But again, if you feel that the crate weapons have a big advantage, that is fine of course. From my experience, i dont feel that they are. I cant remember feeling out-gunned due to some people having those weapons or i didnt feel that i got a big advantage when using them myself. But if you're facing certain types of situations in the game more often than what i did, maybe thats why we feel a bit different about this.

EDIT: Regarding Dark Matter, i see. The only class i got diamond camo in is the launchers :) I'm a good way towards with the assault rifles as well, but i'm kinda done with BO3, so i probably wont unlock much more in the game.
 

Tapejara

Member
Call of Duty®: Infinite Warfare Zombies

Still pissed this isn't Extinction. This might end up being the first CoD game I don't pick up at launch; but Extinction would have swayed me towards a day one purchase.

I gotta give credit to Advanced Warfare on this one. They handled Zombies way better than Treyarch did.

Advanced Warfare was the first time I actually enjoyed Zombies. The exo system made it a lot of fun.
 
Oh you've played it already? How does it play? Smooth? How many weapons? Movement system?

Oh wait..
Pretty nice, 60 fps, makes for smooth gameplay and good controller response but the server side lag bogs that down a bit.
More than 25, less than 50.
Similar to Black Ops 3's movement system.

Of course I haven't played it, just know Call of Duty that well, lol.
 

Overboost

Member
So we don't even get the beta during E3?
COD has never had a beta at E3, or any other game in the genre that I can remember. BO3's beta was in August last year and that was the first time they'd had one in 8 years. All other CODs before BO3 unveiled MP around the Aug/Sept. timeframe so this is completely normal.

They still have a bunch of other content to cover between now and then, like campaign gameplay at E3, zombies mode, storyline details, and now the first XP event since 2011 which frankly seems amazing for fans even if you aren't interested in IW. If they have a beta after that, that's still two months until launch, which is longer than most other games do it these days. Weren't we playing the Overwatch beta 2 weeks before release?
 

H3xum

Member
I thought we were getting a beta? I signed up for something after I pre-ordered on their website. I don't remember the exact verbage but it said "future rewards" or something to that affect.

Probably just e-mails about the DLCs
 

Duxxy3

Member
People here don't seem to know much about the standard Call of Duty media roll out. It's always pretty much like this.

It was standard when they only had two years and were still working hard up until release. Now they have three years.

MP reveal usually happens in August. Last year happened in june with a beta in august.

To a lot of people this says that Activision has little confidence in IW's multiplayer.
 

Kalentan

Member
People here don't seem to know much about the standard Call of Duty media roll out. It's always pretty much like this.

Oh, this is an old thread.

New thread imho for the actual reveal day thread.

I thought we were getting a beta? I signed up for something after I pre-ordered on their website. I don't remember the exact verbage but it said "future rewards" or something to that affect.

Probably just e-mails about the DLCs

If they do it will be announced this weekend.
 

E92 M3

Member
It was standard when they only had two years and were still working hard up until release. Now they have three years.

MP reveal usually happens in August. Last year happened in june with a beta in august.

To a lot of people this says that Activision has little confidence in IW's multiplayer.

Who needs confidence when they have CoD4 :p?
 

kuYuri

Member
There's an interview on VentureBeat where Eric Hirshberg says they are pretty much revealing everything, including IW MP, Zombies, and some more SP, along with MWR SP and MP.
 

Ensoul

Member
I am excited about this game as I am every year. I know the big selling point for many is COD 4. That game came out a long time ago and the MP has changed a ton since then. I wonder if the memory of playing the game will end up being better than the reality.
 
It was standard when they only had two years and were still working hard up until release. Now they have three years.

MP reveal usually happens in August. Last year happened in june with a beta in august.

To a lot of people this says that Activision has little confidence in IW's multiplayer.

These 3 year cycles don't seem to be helping that much thus far quality wise, do they. Advanced Warfare had great mechanics but was totally botched by network and balance factors, Black Ops 3 I just personally didn't like at all. So much money being poured into these games, everything just seems to be watered down.

I'm still hopeful enough, though. The weapons I saw looked really cool. And yea, if nothing else, I'd love to go back to a pretty looking Modern Warfare.
 

Ensoul

Member
These 3 year cycles don't seem to be helping that much thus far, do they. Advanced Warfare had great mechanics but was totally botched by network and balance factors, Black Ops 3 I just personally didn't like at all. So much money being poured into these games, everything just seems to be watered down.

I'm still hopeful enough, though. The weapons I saw looked really cool. And yea, if nothing else, I'd love to go back to a pretty looking Modern Warfare.

AW was decent and I did like the fact they ended up with some new ideas in MP.

I do tend to agree about the three year cycle. I doubt BO3 would have been any better or any worse with a two cycle. I just think that COD is running out of major ideas because almost everything has been done.

I do like BO3 but at this point I have done everything with the game. At this point what keeps me playing is getting 30 crypto keys so I can hopefully get a new weapon.

Ghosts was not great so I am hoping IW redeems themselves with this game.
 
I am excited about this game as I am every year. I know the big selling point for many is COD 4. That game came out a long time ago and the MP has changed a ton since then. I wonder if the memory of playing the game will end up being better than the reality.

for many, I really doubt it. The reason so many like myself had a falling out was the changes you speak of.
 

Papacheeks

Banned
It was standard when they only had two years and were still working hard up until release. Now they have three years.

MP reveal usually happens in August. Last year happened in june with a beta in august.

To a lot of people this says that Activision has little confidence in IW's multiplayer.

Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3 Multiplayer Reveal during xp event

Black op 2 multiplayer reveal august with event in september

Call of Duty Ghosts Multiplayer reveal published on august 14

Advanced Warfighter Multiplayer reveal August 11

August 11 Black ops 3 multiplayer reveal with Beta

Most have been in August, but Infinity ward likes to push it to early September, and looks like they are going the XP event again.
 
Top Bottom