Feel Like Watching The First 15 Minutes Of Modern Warfare 3?

We have a strange feeling this video won't be up for too long, so get it while it's hot. OPM has unearthed the first 15 minutes of Modern Warfare 3 via YouTube. So if you can't wait until the game's released, might as well give it a watch.

It almost goes without saying but... spoilers.

Thanks VG247.


Comments

    Not to be one of "those" commenters, but... I literally can't see any difference between this, Black Ops, MW2 or even MW. It's ridiculous almost to the point of being funny now.

      I can. Maybe if you'd played any of them before passing this kind of judgement...?

        100 hours into CoD4, 70 hours into CoD6, played Black Ops countless times at friends' houses and internet cafes. I have played them. It doesn't take any more than an hour of gameplay to see this is yet another copy + paste job from IW. I miss the CoD series before Activision got so involved in it, back when it was good.

          Same... i've played both campaigns in modern warfare's 1 and 2, and i must say, 2 looked a little bit better, but they aren't great improvements. They are almost identical really. Like DLC or continuations of eachother.

          They just look like the textures have been improved. Kind of like a "high res" texture pack, rather than something new.

          The only thing that's kept me interested is the campaign, but even then, i was never a massive fan. It doesn't even look that interesting anymore - just the same storlyine. The western world gets invaded, etc, etc.

          Sure you could get away with saying they've technically improved slightly, but to say they've revamped it or done a graphical/gameplay overhaul is just plain stupid.

          People will always play this for what it is - call of duty. And of course there will be allegiences. Unfortunately taking "sides" or "fanboyism" often blinds judgement, and people will constantly think they're getting something new and great.

      Seriously, if you think black ops and MW2 looked anything alike, you are either blind, or just dont pay attention. Visually they are MASSIVELY different. Not to mention they do play quite a bit different as well, even down to the average amoutn of time a standard TDM match will last for. MW2 was a much faster game than black ops. This may come from someone with a few hundred hours in each under his belt, but very different.

      Yeah it's my biggest gripe with the CoD series. I wouldn't mind paying for the single player if it were cheaper and standalone and didn't feel like an expansion pack. As far as I can see it has all the same animations, sound effects, HUD, the lot as CoD4.

      Have to say I agree. Looks slightly improved here and there but if if you didn't know better you'd be forgiven for thinking it was an expansion pack. Also couldn't Price and the Russian dude find a place with less gunfire to take Soap?

    15 minutes? So pretty much we've just seen the entire campaign on MW3.

      FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU!!!!!!!!!!

      lol

    inb4 but I don't want to ruin the first half of the game! :p

    I can wait, though I did read the Kotaku story a few months back that outlined the whole campaign, did that article end up being correct in the end?

      Lol umad?

    Really mattroe? I dunno maybe cause I've gone back and have been playing MW2 but i can easily say that i can spot a far amount of more detail within the game, better animations, more textures, looks a hell of a lot smoother. Can't want to get my copy at midnight.

      Sure, there are some graphical updates and engine upgrades, but that's where it stops. There's no justifying a whole new game, it's just Activision cashing a cheque. It's kind of sad that the CoD series has taken this turn.

        Well battlefield series follow a similar trend though. Just not on a annual basis.
        Not a COD fanboy. I'm not buying it. Saving for skyrim. But what you've just said is basically GTA 3 to GTA San Andreas and to GTA4. Battlefield Bad company to BAttlefield 3. Not Much change in terms of gameplay. Just graphics over haul. Then there was the Medal of Honor series that EA whored out til COD took over. Series like COD will go through these phases.

        I guess COD is doing it worse than others. I dont know. Just my 2 cents.

          Fair points man, i to know that one of these years they will make a CoD where i walk away from the series, all good things must come to an end, its just a matter of time.

          I agree. I'm not saying it's exclusive to CoD at all, but it's definitely the worst offender. Even though BF3 isn't a huge leap from BC2, it's still built from the ground up and it's still a new experience. It's the fine line that the developers that make these series have to tred -- keeping the feel of the previous games while still making it fresh. In my opinion, most series do this well. Battlefield, Halo, GTA -- they all keep the same kind of gameplay, but each iteration still feels fresh or adds something new. CoD is a graphics update and a map pack.

            Which is basically the same as all those games you've just said.
            Like

            'Battlefield, Halo, GTA — they all keep the same kind of gameplay, but each iteration still feels fresh or adds something new. CoD is a graphics update and a map pack.'

            Basically all the Halo series are just graphics update and map packs with a few weapons here and there. That being said I see Halo as the second worst offender.

            Call of Duty is no different. Just marketed differently and worse. If it wasnt on a yearly basis then it wouldnt be so bad. But the fact that they are pushing it out like this, is what makes it worse. Nothing wrong with a sequel. But when its forced out on such a basis like COD, the market becomes saturated and the audience will get tired and ask for something new, which is what you and alot of other people are doing.

            Point in case here. Nothing wrong with MW3, just that its just being milked too hard and that detracts from the quality of the final product.

            TL;DR
            MW3 is the same as other sequels from other franchises. ie. Graphics and map packs.
            Quality over quantity wins.

              This is where I can't really argue my points because it now comes down to personal opinion. I play Halo, Battlefield, GTA probably equally to what I play (or played) or CoD, and in my opinion, they don't come close to how bad CoD is in terms of recycling content. Each of those games is built from the ground up and "feels" different -- like I said, they feel like new experiences. CoD is literally a copy + paste job in many areas, from animations to models. There's no care put into any of them, it's Activision cashing in. Same thing's going to happen to CoD as the Guitar Hero and Tony Hawk series.
              Again, I realise that this is a matter of opinion, since the amount of "care" put in or the "feel" of a game can't be measured.

                "CoD is literally a copy + paste job in many areas, from animations to models. "

                Except that those things are different, so... sorry, still not getting it.

                Smoother animations, more detailled graphics, new locations, new maps, new weapons, new systems for Perks and Pointstreaks in multiplayer, new multiplayer game modes. It's all-new content (with the exception of the villain, who they're still chasing from MW2), and the protagonists (presumably we'll spent the maujority of the game playing as Soap or Price). The game is basically on the same engine but the majority of the game itself is new or has been overhauled to fit better with the new content.

                The same basic formula is in place, but it's a sequel - not just a sequel, a continuation of the same story arc, happening in the same world, at the same time.

                What on earth could they possibly have done more differently that would have made any sense whatsoever?

                  "Smoother animations, more detailled graphics, new locations, new maps, new weapons, new systems for Perks and Pointstreaks in multiplayer, new multiplayer game modes"

                  With the exception of game modes, your list can be summerised as "graphical updates, new maps and tweaks". If you're willing to pay $100 for that, then power to you, but you've just proved my point.

                It's all about perception, the only reason you don't like COD is because you see it more often, but it doesn't mean it's the same game, as Eric and Matthew have said. Those other games don't come out nearly as often so it gives the the perception of 'greater improvement'.

    I don't see the problem? I don't see what's sad. The game for me has been fun since CoD 4, i didn't enjoy Black Ops but infinity ward know what they are doing. If a formula works and is still fun would you really expect them to change things drastically?

      I'm not even saying change things drastically, just... change anything. There's nothing about these games that warrants a sequel.
      It's sad because next to no effort is being put into these games, Activision and IW don't care about them any more. A laughably short campaign and a few new maps for $100? Yeah no thanks. That's all I've gotten from the CoD series for the past five years and there's no way I'm falling for it again

        'I’m not even saying change things drastically, just… change anything. There’s nothing about these games that warrants a sequel.'

        Umm..finishing the story?
        LOL thats all I can argue with. Yeah not much going for it in my eyes.

          Haha, that is true, but I'm guessing that this campaign will be less like CoD4's campaign and more like MW2's campaign -- short and tacked on. The focus has definitely shifted towards multiplayer since CoD4.

        16 maps are just a few? New guns, equipment, kill streaks, perks, camos, spec ops survival mode, ELITE integration, i dunno seems completely different to me. Label me a CoD fan boy i couldn't care, i think Infinity Ward and the addition of Sledgehammer are going to put out a well polished game that i'll play for some time to come. Sucks you don't feel the same way, your going to be overlooking some multiplayer deliciousness.

          New guns and equipment? What does that mean? It's a different model and a different texture in the corner of your screen. They aren't additions, they're tweaks. The addition of the survival mode is a legitimate point, though could have easily been achieved through DLC.

          I agree, it does suck I don't feel the same way, CoD2 is the reason I bought a 360 and CoD4 is what got me into PC gaming. I loved the CoD series and I wish it was what it used to be.

            @Mattroe

            What's the difference between BC2 and BF3?

              Suppression!

                Rabble rabble that's just a visual tweak to indicate when people are putting their bullets near you it doesn't change anything herp derp.

                  No. Suppression blurs the vision of the enemy player, making it harder for them to see what's happening. It also prevents health regeneration without a health pack around. Health already regenerates slowly, so suppression is a useful ability that prevents the enemy from advancing and allows your team to move up. I've made comebacks using excessive suppression firing.

              You are such a hypocrite. First you say "Doesn't have to be drastic, just change anything", and then go on to dismiss new maps, weapons as 'tweaks'.

              Hey guess what the definition of that word is? CHANGES.

              I can respect a hater for being a hater because at least they know what they are. You sir, a re being a troll and you don't even know it or don't want to admit it.

                Okay, I'm just going to leave it at this.

                If you're happy to pay $100 every year for the same experience you got last year, whatever. A little sad that people fall for it, but I digress.

                Someone asked for the changed between BC2 and BF3. My thinking is, if you can LIST changes between games, there aren't enough changes. BC2 and BF3 are different games. Health is handled differently, unlocks handle differently, the basic inclusion of prone changes the way the game is played completely, even shooting mechanics are handled differently. It might play similarly in the same way that GTA and Saints Row play similarly, but they're still entirely different games. Each CoD, however, is the exact same experience. There are "changes", yes, but you seem to be happy to pay $100 for nothing more than tweaks. And fine, that's your decision, but CoD will die soon and it didn't have to die at all.

                  Put it this way, what are the differences between BF2 and BC2 to BF3? BF3 is more of a collaboration of the two games rather than something innovative in its own. Also, thinking of the campaign of BF3, you can hardly call even MW2's campaign tacked on. That thing was a mess of quick time events.

                  I'd love to know what you think can be improved. Oh wow, BF3 included prone, if only MW3 included th- oh wait.

                  Unlocks are handled differently? Maybe MW3 should do... oh... huh.

                  Aren't shooting mechanics still basically aim and shoot while looking down ironsights? Is that so substantially different from BC2 that it's anything more than a 'tweak'? As far health, well, I say you don't fix what ain't broke. I'd love to know what MW2 did so badly that it needed to be revamped for MW3.

                  If you want to contrast BC2/MW2 to BF3/MW3 and say that BF3 is a title worth the money when MW3 isn't, then I will settle this by pointing and laughing. You might like Battlefield more than Call of Duty and that's your thing, but I can use the same argument to dismiss BF3, and since I didn't like BC2, why on earth would I buy it?

      That's exactly right... What's wrong with wanting to hold onto a winning formula? Almost every major games series getting released these days holds onto the same core gameplay elements and introduces a few tweaks or improvements to move the series along...

      Think about it: CoD, BF, Assassins Creed, Zelda, Skyrim, Uncharted, Halo, Gears of War, GTA etc. are all incremental improvements on previous entries in their respective series'... And you know what? I'm fine with that... There's a reason I started enjoying those series in the first place and I don't want the developers to change things so drastically that it's unrecognisable when compared to previous entries in the series...

        yes but his point is Activison are milking the fun out of the game with a new game each year when compared to Skyrim from the last entry was 2007 I think.
        but anyway when a series gets pumped out every year it bores the fan and if your willing to play what you played last year for $100 go ahead.

          It annoys me when I see Assassin's Creed going down this path BF, Halo, CoD and Gears Of War have been going down it for years.

    I'm looking forward to this getting released, not because I want to buy it, but there will be less kids on BF3!

      Kids will play whatever's in front of them. And if they think more people are drifting toward BF3, they'll move there too. Just as they migrated from Halo to MW, they're the wave of profanity and immaturity that you have to keep riding and stay in front of.

      Kids are far easier to deal with than arrogant douchebags. At least the kids have the excuse of not knowing better. What's your excuse for being a mouth-breather?

        Bitch.

          Not you, Steve.

    OH YEAH? I HAVE SOMETHING BETTER!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-9j6V52-JU

    You don't fix whats not broken

    Back in the day you had about ten games all based on the same engine over a period of about 2 years. Being annoyed about IW/activision basing a few of their games on one of their engines over a couple of years is silly. Im sure they're working on their next big engine right this second but felt the better option was to use their current engine for the time being and give people more of what they loved the first time around.

      This is 7 games in 6 years using the same engine in the same series from the same publisher utilising the engine in the same way :)

        Same engine? Might wanna check that...

          same engine. Quake 3 based engine with graphical tweaks. Every box of COD has an iD liscence on it.

            Oh I know CoD1 was running idTech 3 albeit heavily modified but it's not the SAME engine. It may have some tiny parts left over but the rewrites and redesigns mean it's not the same engine. If you choose to class that as the same engine though then Battlefield from 1942 up to 2142 used the same engine and BC1 to BF3 use the same engine thus rendering the point made about CoD always using the "same engine" moot.

              Can I hire you to fight all my forum and comment based battles for me?

    Tradeded in MW2 and BO and a few other games that I dont play anymore towards this, ended up costing me 7.95, Only getting for the multiplayer, more a time filler between my BF3 adventures and SKYRIM quests

    I don't mean to burst your bubble people, but it's my understanding IW really only exists in name now. All the senior guys left afer MW2. Sledgehammer was lead studio on single player, Raven Software (They made that wolfenstein game's multiplayer. Fired on launch day for their terrible netcode) were doing the multiplayer. What's left of IW afaik were helping with the singleplayer cause sledgehammer were reportedly struggling.

    Correct me if i'm wrong.

    First fifteen minutes? Thats the entire single player campaign!

    Now Ill scroll back to see how many others have made the joke before me. . .

    go this way shoot this shoot that go down that hallway oh no more bad guys shot this shoot that go that way down this hallway
    look a door throw i flash bang coz it's cool now shoot this shoot that go up that hallway go in this room oh no! shoot this shoot that down the hallway into another room shoot this shoot that you were mortally wounded duck behind cover for a second, now you have some how healed
    go down this hallway into this room shoot this shoot that
    FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU another 15 hours of this shit?!!!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJE1ZA6LmVM this is the game summarised

    lol @ people arguing that cawwadoody isn't rehashed every year, its a business model. i've owned every cod (-mf2) and every battlefield game (yes everyone of them +expansions) so you cant call me a biased fanboy, but call of duty really is just a change of guns and maps, the style is the same, the graphics are the same (although optimisations of newer games allow for more detail) but essentially, they play the same, whereas battlefield 3 is similar to its predecessors in gameplay, but the meta-game changes, mainly because of the date it was set in.

    seriously can't tell the difference between this and Modern Warfare 2.

    Meh.

      didn't get battlefield 3 either in case any of you were going to make that point.

      CoD used to be awesome, its gone down hill after 4. Admit it.

    Soap doesn't die until near the end.

    ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

    I mean seriously

    ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

    Same shit different smell

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now