Help
Share this topic:
What up with Yuri?
#19
ProFishman 
- Advanced Member
-
- Group: Members*
- Posts: 1,503
- Joined: 29-November 11
- Points: 4,975
Posted 10 December 2011 - 12:01 PM
Yh, and in MW2 the guard didnt go through the metal detector to drop his P99 for Yuri
#20
WhiteKid4Sale
- Master Member
-
- Group: Members*
- Posts: 1,791
- Joined: 12-March 11
- Points: 1,135
- LocationNew Jersey
Posted 10 December 2011 - 12:13 PM
Yeah, IW didn't think we'd notice these little things but we do. 
#21
ProFishman
- Advanced Member
-
- Group: Members*
- Posts: 1,503
- Joined: 29-November 11
- Points: 4,975
Posted 10 December 2011 - 12:49 PM
Lol, they were just being lazy in their offices
#22
WhiteKid4Sale
- Master Member
-
- Group: Members*
- Posts: 1,791
- Joined: 12-March 11
- Points: 1,135
- LocationNew Jersey
Posted 10 December 2011 - 03:02 PM
It's not that I can just tell that when IW finished making MW2 they had no idea what they were going to do for MW3, so it wasn't in their minds yet.
#23
Aervid
- Advanced Member
-
- Group: Members*
- Posts: 3,242
- Joined: 01-May 11
- Points: 3,830
Posted 10 December 2011 - 10:23 PM
They were rushed with the one year time. If they didn't have to make a game every year, all the CoD stories would be AWESOME and almost perfect.
And my bad it's two year time limit but still not much time. They should do what Epic Games and other gamdebelopers do come out with a new game every 3-5 years. That way major cod fans won't be disappointed and say ***** about this and that. Plus the multiplayer will be less glitchy and stuff will be less overpowered.
And my bad it's two year time limit but still not much time. They should do what Epic Games and other gamdebelopers do come out with a new game every 3-5 years. That way major cod fans won't be disappointed and say ***** about this and that. Plus the multiplayer will be less glitchy and stuff will be less overpowered.
#24
WhiteKid4Sale
- Master Member
-
- Group: Members*
- Posts: 1,791
- Joined: 12-March 11
- Points: 1,135
- LocationNew Jersey
Posted 11 December 2011 - 03:43 AM
Yeah, I'd be happy with a new CoD game every other year or so, give them at least 3 years to make it...I think the timeo would make the game way better. It's not like people would get bored of playing the most recent CoD title.
#25
Maj R
- Advanced Member
-
- Group: Members*
- Posts: 1,473
- Joined: 02-January 11
- Points: 11,800
Posted 11 December 2011 - 05:55 AM
Aervid, on 10 December 2011 - 10:23 PM, said:
They were rushed with the one year time. If they didn't have to make a game every year, all the CoD stories would be AWESOME and almost perfect.
And my bad it's two year time limit but still not much time. They should do what Epic Games and other gamdebelopers do come out with a new game every 3-5 years. That way major cod fans won't be disappointed and say ***** about this and that. Plus the multiplayer will be less glitchy and stuff will be less overpowered.
And my bad it's two year time limit but still not much time. They should do what Epic Games and other gamdebelopers do come out with a new game every 3-5 years. That way major cod fans won't be disappointed and say ***** about this and that. Plus the multiplayer will be less glitchy and stuff will be less overpowered.
It's a 2 year time, since Treyarch makes a game every other year.
#26
WhiteKid4Sale
- Master Member
-
- Group: Members*
- Posts: 1,791
- Joined: 12-March 11
- Points: 1,135
- LocationNew Jersey
Posted 11 December 2011 - 07:54 AM
Yeah he says that in the 2cd part of his post. I think they should hire a 3rd company so we have a game every year but each studio gets 3 year to make the game. 