-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Supply drops officially coming to Modern Warfare Remastered
- Thread starter Saucycarpdog
- Start date
Neuromancer
Member
This completely misses the entire appeal of the game. Pretty lame Activision. I'm glad that I never cared about this remake.
Good Guy Gone Bad
Member
Ahh the "It's all cosmetic" argument. I remember that from the early days of BO3 lol
Let's go over what happened after it started.
They began putting all sorts of unique weapons in loot boxes that gave players advantages and created disparity and allowed people to spend money on an RNG chance at getting these weapons which split the community and ruined the game.
It always starts at "it's all cosmetic".
Let's go over what happened after it started.
They began putting all sorts of unique weapons in loot boxes that gave players advantages and created disparity and allowed people to spend money on an RNG chance at getting these weapons which split the community and ruined the game.
It always starts at "it's all cosmetic".
Maximus.
Member
Oh they did? Whoa crazy...
Xaero Gravity
NEXT LEVEL lame™
Shh, some people still believe GAF = the mainstream audience.
Sorry but which guns in BO3 gave players advantages? The first three to come out in BO3 were the MX Garand, the Shadowclaw, and the Marshal - only the Marshal was really any good and only at close enough range. The MX Garand is bad simply because you can't reload it until the magazine has been emptied. And the Shadowclaw is situational at best and you have to have decent aim to use effectively.
The rest of the Black Market weapons are all either outright outclassed by base game weapons or very situational at best (and you could still very much use base weapons effectively!).
The only CoD that I would agree with you on giving players advantages through paid weapons would be Advanced Warfare (Speakeasy or the Obsidian Steed, anyone?).
It's not that it's all obtainable in the game without paying it's that it shouldn't be there in the first place.
I bought this game with the understanding that it would be the same as the game I played 10 years ago just with shinier graphics. I should have known not to trust acti but I did. Never once was it stated that the aesthetic would be completely changed. I can't think of any other remaster/remake that has changed the original look this much.
mullet2000
Member
The thing I don't get about some of the aggressive "it's just cosmetic, quit all your hyperbole" posts in here is: Should people who don't like this not express their discontent with it? Why just silently be quiet about it if we don't like it? If large portions of the userbase ends up not liking this and that feedback gets back to Activision, isn't that just a net benefit for everyone?
ElBoxyBrown
Banned
Activision: "We're gonna add in loot boxes in the December update for MWR. But what if they don't like it and don't give us money?"
Blizzard: "Fam, we got you."
Activision:
Blizzard: "Fam, we got you."
Activision:
Yeah but at the same time as you complain about COD you keep throwing bills at them via Overwatch.
I might work if it was a different company, but it's Activision and they've been shown the way.
Sorry but I like the idea of weapon kits - just look at how the Assassin kit changes the look of snipers in the game. If that's their answer to having "new guns" without actually adding new guns then I'm very happy with it
Because they sell the game without lootboxes and then patch them in later.
mullet2000
Member
I've purchased Overwatch boxes because I like their system. I don't purchase COD boxes because I don't like theirs. Isn't it worth letting both the positive and negative feedback be known?
Sorry but I like the idea of weapon kits - just look at how the Assassin kit changes the look of snipers in the game. If that's their answer to having "new guns" without actually adding new guns then I'm very happy with it
If you like it that's fine! I'm just saying I don't get why some people seem so eager to dismiss or mock people who voice that they don't like it.
So as long as people are content with Cod4 as it is What's the problem? I don't see how adding cosmetic stuff Changes The core game.
Sorry but I like the idea of weapon kits - just look at how the Assassin kit changes the look of snipers in the game. If that's their answer to having "new guns" without actually adding new guns then I'm very happy with it
Got any screens?
So what about the actual new guns that were found in the game files alongside some of the things found in the PC files before the update? Like the Striker, Galil, or .44 Magnum, or even the Kamchatka-12, which hasn't been in any other game?Sorry but I like the idea of weapon kits - just look at how the Assassin kit changes the look of snipers in the game. If that's their answer to having "new guns" without actually adding new guns then I'm very happy with it
https://www.destructoid.com/hidden-...mastered-may-point-to-future-dlc-399543.phtml
Saucycarpdog
Member
Ah yes. The old "They're not overpowered so it's ok" argument. Apparently although we've arrived at the point that many people joked about years ago, weapons being behind loot boxes, people still defend it.
How is locking brand new weapons that could only realistically be gotten by spending money a fair and balanced multiplayer? The odds of getting a new weapon in Black ops 3 were calculated at about 1% or rather you would have to spend $60 on average to get just one.
The Last Wizard
Member
lol yea, I'm done with cod. Couldn't just give us a vanilla remaster could they.
https://youtu.be/FXthk8UKo20?t=189
That's the Assassin weapon kit on the M40A3 sniper. Looks like a completely different weapon - and it's all cosmetic! Camos look amazing on it too.
Developers add things in games all the time that end up not being used, it's not uncommon.
It's fair and balanced because the BM exclusive weapons are not overpowered.
It would NOT be fair and balanced if the BM weapons outclassed every other base game weapon in it's weapon class.
I only ever got the MX Garand in the 100's of hours I played of BO3, I never cared. Why? Because I could still pull off very high streaks and have a good SPM and K/D using the Kuda or the Weevil or whatever was the flavor of the month weapon.
Thanks.
Fair enough the Assassin kits look good but the pride versions look ridiculous and don't fit with the aesthetic of the original game.
I also wonder how much grind is required to unlock all these.
They were found at the same time as the other things that were released in this update. The odds are that they will be added within the next few months, which is about how long it took for new weapons to show up in BOIII.
First post nails it.
Activision: "We're gonna add in loot boxes in the December update for MWR. But what if they don't like it and don't give us money?"
Blizzard: "Fam, we got you."
Activision:
they get your money either way dude
Saucycarpdog
Member
The Marshall 16 was hands down the best sidearm in Black ops 3. It was a pocket shotgun. Even drif0r says so.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=c3SrCHEP0n4
But let me guess. Because it doesn't make you invincible it's not OP?
.
I was OK with the medals and stuff because those could easily be turned off. Is it too much to ask for a pure MW experience with updated graphics?
manfestival
Member
Can't figure out what is worse. This or overwatch. Absolutely disgusting. Thanks Activision
I'm ok with cosmetic stuff, but if they start adding new weapons and changing gameplay-related things I'm done. They already went to all that work to recreate COD 4 perfectly, with no new balance changes, if they start fucking with shit now I'll be pissed off. Gun skins etc. I can deal with, it's an unfortunate reality of multiplayer games these days that I've learned to put up with.
IISANDERII
Member
Creep Activision are experts at grooming
It was nerfed quite a bit - and even at it's release you didn't see it all that often. Also, it's a close quarters miniature shotgun so it SHOULD be good at it's intended range.
If I saw anyone using it, I'd just pull out my M8 class and take people down from afar. Not a problem at all.
Saucycarpdog
Member
I'm Good with the Loot boxes. (Just dont buy)
Also what did Treyarch do that Sledgehammer didn't? All the hate AW received was from the belief a better product was coming in Blops3
As other poster have pointed out you cant applaud "x" game then bash Y and Z game for the same shit.
Corleth the Fey
Member
Please don't break the fucking game Activision before I get to play it at Xmas - courtesy of the in-laws. Thanks.
Lol. It's the only secondary shotgun.
The RK5 and the LCAR-9 were still better in any range other than close quarters.
Not to mention Akimbo LCAR's dominated for awhile.
Saucycarpdog
Member
Exactly. It's the only secondary shotgun, which absolutely wrecks at close range. And close range is the only time most people use a secondary.
Stop with the revisionist history. No one is going to be trying to use a secondary at anything but close range.
Kwansu Dudes
Member
BO3 has that OHK crossbow secondary which I would love to have.
The Freeman
Member
I think those making the comparison to Overwatch miss the point. Loot boxes were in Overwatch from day 1, it's how the game was originally intended.
People bought MW:R because they wanted to relive the glory days of Modern Warfare through improved graphics on their shiny new machines. Incorporating loot boxes not only ruins the nostalgia, it makes it similar to other games in the franchise and helps it lose a little of its identity.
It would be like re releasing Jaws with a CGI shark in place of the rubber one.
People bought MW:R because they wanted to relive the glory days of Modern Warfare through improved graphics on their shiny new machines. Incorporating loot boxes not only ruins the nostalgia, it makes it similar to other games in the franchise and helps it lose a little of its identity.
It would be like re releasing Jaws with a CGI shark in place of the rubber one.
As long as they do not provide weapons or anything that affects gameplay, let them do the supply drops. If it's just cosmetic stuff, then the money from the packs can fund additional maps brought to the community free of charge without destroying the balance in return.
Yes it makes CoD4 visually different but as long as the maps and gameplay are there, what's the big deal? The moment they start to sell weapons and attachments, you can boycott the game.
Yes it makes CoD4 visually different but as long as the maps and gameplay are there, what's the big deal? The moment they start to sell weapons and attachments, you can boycott the game.
Nah I used the MR6/RK3 quite a bit at long range especially in HC
firehawk12
Subete no aware
Considering this is like 60 bucks on PSN now, they must be fucking desperate.
Maybe the next game will include the entire BLOPs trilogy remastered with loot crates.
Maybe the next game will include the entire BLOPs trilogy remastered with loot crates.