Modern Warfare 3 On Wii Is In Familiar Hands

Modern Warfare 3 On Wii Is In Familiar Hands

The upcoming Modern Warfare 3 is being developed by Infinity Ward. Or, at least, what’s left of it. The Wii version, however, is being developed by somebody else, somebody just as familiar with the series, if not quite as popular with its fans.

That developer is Treyarch, the team behind Call of Duty 3, World at War and Black Ops. If you’re wondering why some of their team is “stuck” on the Wii port, well, they’ve got a ton of experience on the platform, having handled the Nintendo home console versions of World at War, Modern Warfare and Black Ops, as well as having turned out 2008’s Spider-Man: Web of Shadows on the Wii.

Modern Warfare 3 is due not only on Wii but PS3, 360, PC, 3DS and Vita. Most of those versions, Vita excepted, should be out in November.

One of Swords Podcast 080: Superfluous Zippers [One of Swords]


      • I don’t get why everybody hates Treyarch. I’ve no love for either but MW2 is without a doubt the worst FPS the last decade produced. At least Black Ops had Zombies and not as much bullshit in the multiplayer.

        If you’d prefer being knifed from 10 foot away with Commando and being constantly killed by people sporting noob-tubes with unlimited grenades with One-Man-Army and Danger Close in MW2, then go right ahead.

        Black Ops is still a shitty game but I’d take it, or any FPS, over MW2 any day.

        • /disagree

          I played mw2 again after being unsatisfied with blops and it’s despot spawns and general averageness. It felt fresh and tight and the way an fps like this should feel. No one was even whoring the tube. Also, the weapons are cooler and captain price and soap rock.

    • So Treyarch aren’t in the same class as Infinity Ward when it comes to level design and AI, but at least they try and deliver something different to the done-to-death ‘Americans fighting foreigners in modern combat’. World at War was a different take on WW2 and Black Ops took us to seldom-explored eras, and had a reasonably coherent story with sci-fi elements. A story. That’s more than I can say for the Modern Warfare series. Still, for pacing, gameplay, and overall tightness, I can’t go past MW2.

      • You know they ripped the story almost verbatim from the Manchurian candidate, so I wouldn’t exactly congratulate them for that.

  • Modern Warfare 3 sums up everything that is wrong with game development, marketing and artistic credit as there is. It WILL be bad.

  • If I remember correctly, didn’t Treyarch actually just port the previous games onto Wii rather than remake them or make separate versions? I don’t see why they wouldn’t just port MW3 to wii rather than remake it either. So, as far as I’m concerned, this is really just the normal MW3 game being ported, rather than Treyarch doing anything that involves core changes to gameplay.

    That said, I’m going to be paying more attention to BF3. Too hard to get back to CoD when all the games are overpriced.

  • I have no idea who would have sanctioned a Wii port with the sales nose-diving so steeply. What do they think will happen? That our playstations will break and we’ll find a doorstop to replace the wii at the same time? Unlikely.

    Anyway, Battlefield 3

    • ^ This. Which brings me to my other point. Before I got a 360 I played World at War on the PS2, with the campaign at least there’s barely any difference in the gameplay.

      If PS2 can handle the “demanding graphics” of Call of Duty then the Wii won’t have any problems.

Show more comments

Log in to comment on this story!