We take a look at inXile's cRPG successor Wasteland 2
Wasteland 2 Reviewed
AusGamers takes a deep and hard look at just what Bungie has to offer in their newest sci-fi world, and just where our Destiny may lay.
Destiny Reviewed
AusGamers had the chance to sit down and chat with lead programmer and local Australian Ian Hern on all things Kraden’s Crypt.
Interview with Ian Hern on Kraden's Crypt
We take a look at all the local talent Australia has to offer for the gaming scene
Indie Friday: A Look at Australian Gaming
Post by Dan @ 10:00pm 26/05/11 | 20 Comments
A couple of weeks after leaked artwork and assets from Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 provoked an early unveil, publisher Activision have now released the first few official high resolution images of the game.

To kick things off, we've got a taste of day time, a taste of night time and some hot underwater action, hinting at some sub aquatic good times. Click the thumbs below for a closer look.

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 is due on PC, Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 on November 8th 2011




call of dutymodern warfare 3infinity wardactivision
Buy now from Green Man Gaming for only GBP£26.99 (USD$39.99 on Steam)!
(compare all prices)





Latest Comments
Ryan
Posted 10:07pm 26/5/11
I'm 50/50 on this... I do enjoy the multiplayer for a couple of weeks after release (if it works), but after that it's uninstalled. :P
carson
Posted 10:31pm 26/5/11
BF3 still looks a million times better.
qmass
Posted 11:19pm 26/5/11
BF3 still looks a million times better.
Good point!
step
Posted 11:27pm 26/5/11
If they can return to MW1 gameplay, then hells yeah. Otherwise it's BF3.
Stalfax
Posted 11:29pm 26/5/11
I call bulls*** on "new engine". Looks the same as MW2.
DeadlyButters
Posted 03:23am 27/5/11
ohh s*** yea tht is definately the mw2 engine they lie if they say otherwise. looks like they have rehashed models from mw2 and 1 this game is going straight to the place games go to die lol!!
reLapse
Posted 06:28am 27/5/11
It's the same engine in every game since the beginging, just modified.
Sc00bs
Posted 08:07am 27/5/11
why dont they spend a yr developing a new engine instead of new skins for the old engine.

lazy f****
paveway
Posted 08:12am 27/5/11
why dont they spend a yr developing a new engine instead of new skins for the old engine.


because then they would need to go a year without releasing a new COD..

that is silly talk



Morbz
Posted 08:37am 27/5/11
Well im awaiting the MP, should be a worthy purchase i mean when i get pwned to much on bf3 lol ill go and play mw3 and get pwned again vis versa haha
Sc00bs
Posted 08:39am 27/5/11
MP will be the same as every other cod MP?

all they do is add 3 new guns, new gun skins, 2 new map skins, all the old maps and new character skins and thats it.

Python
Posted 08:54am 27/5/11
Looks good, hopefully they get an in game trailer out soon as well. MW, MW2 and BO have been fun so MW3 should be as well!

last edited by Python at 08:54:21 27/May/11
Trauma
Posted 10:31am 27/5/11
Can't say they aren't cost efficient.
ShwaMiller86
Posted 11:16am 27/5/11
Ausgamers reported the other day:

"In another Tweet answering a question from a fan regarding the tech behind the game, Bowling had this to say:
We haven't gone into detail on the engine yet but we've moved beyond the MW2 engine and added a lot of cool stuff for #MW3."

But yeah it looks identical.

As to why they don't make a new engine... they wouldn't need to take a year off - that's what Treyarch is for. Literally. That's why Activision put the leap frog development cycle into place.

IW release proper COD.
Treyarch release distraction COD.
IW develop new technology and release proper COD.
Treyarch are given that new technology and release distraction COD.
IW develop even newer technology and release proper COD... and so on.
Morbz
Posted 11:45am 27/5/11
if its cheap im in :P
Dan
Posted 11:49am 27/5/11
As to why they don't make a new engine... they wouldn't need to take a year off - that's what Treyarch is for. Literally. That's why Activision put the leap frog development cycle into place.
I agree that people need to understand that there are different studios working on the alternating games, but what I don't agree with is that a new game every 2 years is a good thing for a single studio.

Modern Warfare, and Call of Duty as a whole is clearly beginning to suffer from serious IP fatigue. Sure, they're still making big dollars now, but all it's going to take is for one under performing product to bury the whole franchise. With BF3 looming big over this one and the studios creating MW3 being largely unproven after a serious bit talent exodus, it's far from a sure thing.

About the only thing we can guarantee is that Activision will spend a s***-tonne of money promoting it. I'm not predicting it's failure, but i'm definitely reserving judgement until I have my hands on the final product.
ShwaMiller86
Posted 12:01pm 27/5/11
I just think it is terribly sad that COD isn't COD anymore. And that 90% of players don't know what COD really was - and should be. COD1, UO and 2 really had that amazing, full-size army collaboration feel. It was all smoke and mirrors, but it worked!

It had that sense that you were at war. Modern Warfare took us backwards to that Medal of Honor feel where you're a godly man taking on the world.

It sucks that the franchise has run away from them. It is suffering terrible fatigue. It is too successful to not make more, but each game is increasingly worse. I can't stand when people harp on about how good CODBLOPS was... it was horrendous. The 'story' was so far beyond the realms of moronic it was embarrassing. It totally undermined the warfare feel that COD built itself on.

Now people just play through the pathetically short SP to reach increasingly boring MP.

As for the future, its hard to say... but even Guitar Hero went down. If a behemoth franchise like that can collapse - and it used the same release cycle and marketing tactics as COD does - then so can COD. And probably very, very suddenly.
Enska
Posted 12:15pm 27/5/11
About the only thing we can guarantee is that Activision will spend a s***-tonne of money promoting it. I'm not predicting it's failure, but i'm definitely reserving judgement until I have my hands on the final product.


This.
Dan
Posted 12:24pm 27/5/11
Well Guitar Hero was a bit different in that it was built on a gimmick and perhaps it was actually better -- from a business perspective -- for them to cash in as much as they could on that one while the fad still had legs.

CoD however, could still meet a similar fate. The franchise really needs to catch its breath because the current rate just doesn't seem sustainable. Quality will eventually suffer as a result of the short development cycle and a competitor will scoop up the fanbase. Whether that happens this November with BF3, or the year after or the year after that is the only question.

My my point of view, I think they'd benefit much more from a 2 year cycle. Just space out the releases that little bit more and continue support for the games that people are all still playing. But I could be wrong. it's paid off for them pretty hugely this far.

The big X factor as I said previously, is whether the new dev teams are even capable of maintaining Infinity Ward's past quality, let alone actually pushing the boundaries further. Both IW and Sledgehammer are now essentially two unproven studios.

As many have pointed out, visually, it's really not looking much better (if at all) and that's really all we have to go on so far, so that's not a great start.
ShwaMiller86
Posted 02:19pm 27/5/11
I agree. But I think DICE and EA are just smarter in the development regard.

Not releasing Bad Company on PC was a huge pain, but when BC2 came out you could see why. That's even more prevalent with Battlefield 3 and what is supposed to be a triumphant return to PC gaming - they had a risky game idea and needed to test the waters in a somewhat locked down version of Battlefield.

First, testing the console viability. Then testing to see if PC gamers were still interested. Now they know everything they need to know, because they took risks. Albeit measured risks, but they still took them.

And as a part of that they also introduced a SP element to the franchise, which we now know is here to stay... and here to help drive console sales that help keep the brand strong. They have also maintained an incredibly generous attitude toward post release support.

CoD, on the other hand, is just the same stuff recycled. Despite the demise of MoH at least they almost always tried something new and had open minds about trying out new engines and styles.

Anyway, feel like I'm beating this one to death - its just all very MEH.

Also, when the first in-engine trailer came out for MW2 you guys did post that it looked pretty dated, then commended the graphics closer to release, so there's time... I just think that there may not be the talent.
Commenting has been locked for this item.
20 Comments
Show
Close