Why Modern Warfare 3 Remains An Un-Game (the battle of journalists continues).

[chickdigger802]

Search is broke, so it's hard to tell if this was posted already. Anyhow it all started from John Walker's RPS review for MW3 single player.

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/11/18/wot-i-think-modern-warfare-3-single-player/

This was responded to by Brendan Keogh, of Kill Screen magazine and Edge.

http://www.kotaku.com.au/2011/11/mo...walker-you-are-an-un-player-and-that-is-okay/

which was responded to.

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/11/28/why-modern-warfare-3-remains-an-un-game/

Jim Sterling also responded: http://www.destructoid.com/call-of-duty-modern-warfare-3-is-a-videogame-so-deal-216580.phtml

Fun times!

Will update if more fun things happen.

 

[epmode]

God I love Rock Paper Shotgun.

 

[Heavy's Sandvich]

RPS laying down some truth bombs.

 

[NBtoaster]

Seems like someone who goes into the game with his mind already made up and nitpicks every minor flaw.

 

[epmode]

Really, this is such a great critique:

Videogames often allow us to live out fantasies, to be who we could never be with our saggy, regular-person frames and lives. A soldier fighting in a near-future war, with access to the finest in military hardware? Maybe I could be the squad leader? Maybe I could be the hero? Maybe I could be the one who’s allowed to open doors? But no, of course not, you are – as ever – the grunt, being barked at throughout, forced to do whatever the game/game characters tell you to, which is usually to sweep up after them and the party they’re having in front.

It fascinates me that this is the successful formula, the secret behind being the biggest FPS series of all time. It turns out people don’t want to be that hero at the forefront, making glorious decisions and bravely leading the way. They want to be the nobody who can only ever do what he’s told, and that’s on the rare occasions when he’s actually able to control himself. This game has the word “follow” on screen almost as often as it doesn’t. It floats above the head of whomever it is you’re with, ensuring you know your place, which is never to be in front, never to pick the direction, never to make a tactical decision. You follow. It says so.

In fact Modern Warfare 3 seems to make special effort, more-so than ever before, to literally shove you out of the way if you ever get ideas above your station. Realise you’re going through that open tunnel next, because there’s nowhere else to go? Just try it. The NPCs immediately barge you out of the way, bumping you to the back of the line, like the bigger kids in the dinner queue, making sure they leave you only the cabbage. Reach a closed door, and you’ll have to wait for everyone else to get there to open it for you, because you are below the status of someone who can open doors, and you should bloody well know it. Get to the back, shoot the baddies that are left over when the game people have had their fun, and shut up. There’s one level, halfway through the game, where you’re literally told every single move you make. “Jump over this! Crawl here! Stand still! Drop down under there! Wait by this door!” It’s like the world’s worst tutorial escaped, grew sentient, and programmed itself into the bulk of the game.

 

[teruterubozu]

The ung-game thing has been going on with COD for several iterations now. Why bring it up now? Shut up and just play multiplayer.

 

[chickdigger802]

Seems like someone who goes into the game with his mind already made up and nitpicks every minor flaw.

So... pretty much like every mw3 review?

 

[RedSwirl]

Am I wrong for enjoying the SP campaign immensely?

I mean, this is the kind of design COD does on purpose. It's not trying to be an open game at all. It is literally a theme park ride with a "story" bolted onto it. It's two steps removed from a rail shooter, and it's a very good one at that with excellent controls and good level design.

I do hate that this kind of game design has become a trend though because most other games that attempt it do so poorly.

 

[rpmurphy]

Jim Sterling also responded: http://www.destructoid.com/call-of-duty-modern-warfare-3-is-a-videogame-so-deal-216580.phtml

 

[fernoca]

Interesting exchange and points from both sides. But.. "un-games"?...ugh. Is like every recent generation someone needs to create/use a derogatory term for games said person doesn't like: "kiddy games", "casual games".


In any case, I'm enjoying the MW3 campaign. Granted, I put it on hold to play Zelda.

 

[ultron87]

He suggests that you are only following along while other people do the cool stuff. That isnt true at all. You are the one doing most of the cool stuff in the campaign. You take the shots and breach the doors and man the heavy weapons.

 

[chickdigger802]

Am I wrong for enjoying the SP campaign immensely?

I mean, this is the kind of design COD does on purpose. It's not trying to be an open game at all. It is literally a theme park ride with a "story" bolted onto it. It's two steps removed from a rail shooter, and it's a very good one at that with excellent controls and good level design.

I do hate that this kind of game design has become a trend though because most other games that attempt it do so poorly.

You can never be wrong. It's your god damn opinion! The enjoyment of these games are pretty much due to which side of the S&M coin you exist on.

I'm enjoying the campaign fine for the most part. When it works it works great, but when something 'breaks' it greatly hurts your immersion, which is pretty much all this 'type of game' has going.

 

[Reznor]

Ha, this was actually a good read... well, the RPS parts.

 

[Heavy's Sandvich]

Jim Sterling really reminds me of Ben Elton for some reason.

Edit: "sneering arrogance" - yeah I'm out.

 

[Chairman Yang]

Seems like someone who goes into the game with his mind already made up and nitpicks every minor flaw.

Actually, it doesn't seem like that at all. RPS is criticizing the fundamental design of the game, not nitpicking.

 

[DMeisterJ]

I quite enjoyed the single-player. Infinitely moreso than MW2, and it's up there with MW1's to me.

This is again another reviewer who dislikes a linear game, and wants more choice and open-world in their game, and went into the review with that sentiment. I think a highly streamlined campaign is really great. I plan on replaying the campaign on Vet for the achievements/intel, and because it's a really fun game.

 

[Heavy's Sandvich]

It would help if we read what the RPS dude actually said.

 

[davepoobond]

the name "call of duty" itself suggests military enlistment... i wouldn't think its very duteous to be out in the front of line shooting up all those anti-Americans at your free will.

 

[TemplaerDude]

Nail on the fucking head, RPS. A brilliant critique.

Jim Sterling also responded: http://www.destructoid.com/call-of-duty-modern-warfare-3-is-a-videogame-so-deal-216580.phtml

And I continue to not give a shit about what that twit writes.

I quite enjoyed the single-player. Infinitely moreso than MW2, and it's up there with MW1's to me.

This is again another reviewer who dislikes a linear game, and wants more choice and open-world in their game, and went into the review with that sentiment. I think a highly streamlined campaign is really great. I plan on replaying the campaign on Vet for the achievements/intel, and because it's a really fun game.

Might want to read his response, I think he makes it clear that that isn't what he is asking for at all.

 

[Biggest-Geek-Ever]

Is it bad I never knew RPS dished out articles this good? The difference between that critique and the Dtoid response is hilarious.

 

[TemplaerDude]

Is it bad I never knew RPS dished out articles this good? The difference between that critique and the Dtoid response is hilarious.

RPS is one of the best focused websites out there with a bunch of terrific writers. Destructoid is alright but marred by the fact that Jim Sterling is in charge for some mysterious reason.

 

[ArjanN]

He suggests that you are only following along while other people do the cool stuff. That isnt true at all. You are the one doing most of the cool stuff in the campaign. You take the shots and breach the doors and man the heavy weapons.

This.

Also, the term "un-game" is completely cringeworthy.

 

[woober]

Is it bad I never knew RPS dished out articles this good? The difference between that critique and the Dtoid response is hilarious.

RPS has great writing and I love reading their reviews. They're also very PC gaming-centric, so that works out for me, too.

 

[chickdigger802]

It would help if we read what the RPS dude actually said.

first link.

 

[we.are.the.armada]

Damn, COD matters more than I thought. I can definitely see this "un-game" description for the SP. Honestly, I thought the SP was the weakest of the MW series but the MP is pretty polished and Survival is great.

 

[outunderthestars]

Am I wrong for enjoying the SP campaign immensely?

I mean, this is the kind of design COD does on purpose. It's not trying to be an open game at all. It is literally a theme park ride with a "story" bolted onto it. It's two steps removed from a rail shooter, and it's a very good one at that with excellent controls and good level design.

I do hate that this kind of game design has become a trend though because most other games that attempt it do so poorly.

There is nothing wrong with enjoying anything. Don't let a critic change that.


Personally I agree with the RPS writer and respect the opinion of the killscreen writer as well. I wish we had more editorial content like this in the gaming press.

I don't care for the COD games' singleplayer missions and was never able to explain why. Now I understand it. I enjoy freedom and control in games, and the overly scripted aspects of MW3 make the game seem more like an experience rather than something I am controlling.

I find myself drawn to games like Fallout, Animal Crossing, and Saints Row because I want to feel like I am in control of the world I am playing within.

I feel like MW3 is the shooter equivalent of a FF13: a wonderful experience that I have little to no impact upon.

 

[Dabanton]

To be honest that Jim Sterling article was pretty good.

 

[JoeBoy101]

RPS is one of the best focused websites out there with a bunch of terrific writers. Destructoid is alright but marred by the fact that Jim Sterling is in charge for some mysterious reason.

Only pure gaming site I go to.

 

[CoffeeJanitor]

COD is not popular because of the SP. What are these guys talking about...

 

[Das-J]

He makes some salient points and I find the rush to defend MW3 hilarious.

 

[Heavy's Sandvich]

first link.

My sincerest apologies, was in reply to those stating his complaints were of linearity.

 

[Y2Kev]

Seems like someone who goes into the game with his mind already made up and nitpicks every minor flaw.

Really? You read his critique, which by the way is fairly complimentary ("clearly the work of enormously talented game designers"), of the fundamental game premise as nitpicking?

Those articles responding to RPS are if like you put Sarah palin against Stephen hawking in a discussion on space time. RPS so effectively communicates an experience.

Also, you have to be insane to argue that a game that has "follow" on the screen 70% of the time is about as linear as half life 2.

 

[Doc Holliday]

Because honestly, Modern Warfare 3 is about as "open" as the Half-Life series. More importantly, it's as open as Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare which everybody loved before the series became too popular and needed taking down a peg or two.

I haven't played MW3 but I have played MW2 and MW and no way is Half Life 2 as linear as those games. Besides I think RPS was stating how lousy of a job COD does at hiding it's linearity. Surely there was only one route to take in Half-life 2 but most of the times it felt like you had more move to maneuver or things to try out.

 

[ultron87]

The gist of the article is a genetally fair critique except for the one inaccuracy I pointed out earlier.

Suggesting that it somehow makes it not a game is patently ridiculous. The word game includes an incredible plethora of activities. I'm pretty sure you can fit Call of Duty somewhere between Skyrim and Candyland.

 

[chickdigger802]

Is it bad I never knew RPS dished out articles this good? The difference between that critique and the Dtoid response is hilarious.

you really should check out Walker's editorial about the whole Fox News Bullestorm thing earlier this year.

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?s=bulletstormgate&x=0&y=0

 

[Fugu]

I love the throwback to when scripted events were a bad word. I'm still partial to seeing them mostly abolished, which would explain why I haven't finished the single-player campaign of an FPS in a great number of years. And it's sort of funny to see the same criticisms once levelled against them now used to deride an entire game: That all of the things that make scripted events (Call of Duty) interesting occur independently of you and, indeed, the function of the gameplay itself. Everyone else is doing fun stuff and all you get to do is shoot some guys.

 

[MomoPufflet]

It would help if we read what the RPS dude actually said.

It's actually a really interesting, well-written critique of the game, and it's a shame that it's going to get ripped apart because people on the internet can't process differing opinions no matter how well-considered they are.

 

[Stallion Free]

This article could have been written about 4-5 times each year just name swapping.

And you can quit and resume mid-mission.

 

[EmCeeGramr]

I haven't played MW3 but I have played MW2 and MW and no way is Half Life 2 as linear as those games. Besides I think RPS was stating how lousy of a job COD does at hiding it's linearity. Surely there was only one route to take in Half-life 2 but most of the times it felt like you had more move to maneuver or things to try out.

And despite its linearity, there were huge stretches in (especially) HL1 and HL2 where you were completely on your own without a partner or squad to follow. It was one of the exemplars of linear design, yet you still felt like a badass. Same with Crysis 1, which is overall a fairly linear game where the player is a soldier following orders, yet does a great job making them feel in control.

Anyway now I want to see John Walker play MW2 so he can react to No Russian, RAMIREZ DEFEND THE BURGER TOWN RAMIREZ RAMIREZ RAMIREZ, and randomly nuked astronaut in space.

 

[rdrr gnr]

I'm sorry, are they talking about single player? BWAHAHA.

Keep it up game journalists.

 

[Deadbeat]

So people who didnt read the RPS article are responding to it in their own articles. Amazing.

randomly nuked astronaut in space.

You know how in Titanic that one guy fell off the balcony and hit the propeller? Thats the propeller guy in MW2.

 

[Imbarkus]

COD is not popular because of the SP. What are these guys talking about...

Seriously. The SP campaign is increasingly irrelevant and mainly exists to tie up the plot threads of MW2.

The MP experience, by contrast, allows you to be out-in-front, making tactical decisions, deciding how best to counter the opposing force.

And, for those who do not invest in the training required to get good at this, the experience mostly involves running out into a new area and getting immediately gunned down. This is exactly what the SP experience would be if it put you in command, at least at first.

Everyone can have their opinion. But reviewing the game completely on the SP experience is not reviewing the full experience available within the game.

 

[-COOLIO-]

i skimmed through the articles but i found RPS' issues sound and kotaku's responses to be idiotic.

"You can dress up your disregard for the series with a sense of artificial intellectualism, but Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 is a videogame. Nut up and deal with it."

is an embarrassingly child-like closing.

i also found the parody of the "no offense but..." kotaku opening by RPS to be hilarious and awesome:

"Indeed, I don’t think we’ve talked, but I’m sure you’re super-lovely. High five! Also, I agree that I’m endlessly awesome! But let’s not get distracted."

 

[Y2Kev]

He suggests that you are only following along while other people do the cool stuff. That isnt true at all. You are the one doing most of the cool stuff in the campaign. You take the shots and breach the doors and man the heavy weapons.

Isn't part of it that it's not your decision to do any of those things? These triggers happen independently of you.

No comment on the phrase "un-game." It's definitely a game.

 

[MarshMellow96]

This article could have been written about 4-5 times each year just name swapping.

Aaaand we're done.

 

[Biggest-Geek-Ever]

RPS is one of the best focused websites out there with a bunch of terrific writers. Destructoid is alright but marred by the fact that Jim Sterling is in charge for some mysterious reason.

Cool, definitely favorited now.

By the way, I think we need a different term than "un-game", which sounds pretty unnatural to me. I suggest "faux game"

 

[Zefah]

The ung-game thing has been going on with COD for several iterations now. Why bring it up now? Shut up and just play multiplayer.

Why would video games critic criticize a video game?!

He's bringing it up now, because, if you're not aware, a new iteration in the series was recently released and this problem that you seem to willing to accept is worse than ever.

 

[TemplaerDude]

I'm sorry, are they talking about single player? BWAHAHA.

Keep it up game journalists.

It is part of the game and, for people like me who have no interest in the multiplayer, the only reason we would buy it.

 

[(._.)]

some of these walls of text written by blogger journalists are worse than some threads found around on message boards. "un-game" what?

 

[Chuck Norris]

MW3 is a game. A bland, unimaginative, rehash of a game.