I…what the…HUH??
Absolutely baffling!
"I’ll explain: Before you can launch Modern Warfare 3, you have to launch Modern Warfare 2 first. Seriously. “Call of Duty HQ” is just the Modern Warfare 2/Warzone client under a new name.
Switching between Modern Warfares 2 and 3 from the HQ is not like switching modes. Once you’re on the main menu, you could jump immediately into Warzone or a multiplayer match of MW2. Clicking the Modern Warfare 3 button, however, closes the HQ app and launches an entirely different executable called Modern Warfare 3. There is no option to just launch Modern Warfare 3, because “Modern Warfare 3” is not its own game. It’s buried, literally, inside CoD HQ as a piece of add-on content.
The result? It takes 70-90 seconds to launch Modern Warfare 3—at least, those are the times I’m getting. That’s an eternity for CoD, but what’s baffling is that these extra steps serve no discernable purpose for players. Perhaps Activision pitched the CoD HQ with consoles in mind, where games aren’t so easily organized by series and an app that switches between the handful of still-active CoDs is useful."
What if you don’t own MW2?
You can actually download it without buying . I wanted to play warzone on ps5 . Took forever to find the download for it but it basically makes you download all of modern warfare 2 just to play the free to play parts .
Then you can’t run MW3. If not for the date, I’d honestly have suspected that Activision were doing a huge April fool’s prank!
I doubt that. I bet they package the client with 3 but you don’t get any actual mw2 content.
Other way around, according to the article: the launcher considers it a mod for MWF 2 and as such it can only be launched by first entering the lobby of MWF2. It has no independently launchable executable file.
So there’s nothing really unique about it? It’s just a cash grab selling a mod as an entire game?
I honestly don’t know. The contents of the short article linked in the OP is literally all I know about the third of the modern warfares 😄
This is very wrong. They’ve been doing this with Warzone (which is free-to-play) for a while. If you try to launch MW2 from the launcher when you don’t own it it just takes you to a page to buy it. There’s no way they would lock you out of a game you own just because you don’t own another game in the launcher. Not defending the practice though still completely ridiculous you have to launch the MW2 launcher first.
Oh. Guess first reading the article at 4am my time DID impair reading comprehension somewhat! My bad 😄
Still a bizarre way to to it, though
It’s okay to blacklist an entire publisher.
I haven’t bought any games from EA at all since 2013 and know I missed nothing because it’s all just reruns of the same game formula.
Mirror’s Edge and It Takes Two are genuinely amazing
It takes two looked great, but there are just so many games out there I still feel ok having missed it.
Mirrors edge was 2008.
I mean CS:GO was 2012, and it only “died” a few months ago. Hell, Mario 64 was 1996, and it still has a huge following. Genuinely good games remain timeless
Edit: forgot about the part where you mentioned “since 2013,” so ignore my point
CS:GO is a valve title not EA. I was specifically referring to EA.That aside…
CS:GO was only a repackaging of CS expansion which itself was a repackaging of CS half-life mod from 1998.
Sure 14 years later the graphics engine was a little updated and there were new maps, but I played a lot of the original and after installing CS:GO I was supremely underwhelmed by the lack of change.
It Takes Two too often borrowed from that “well that just happened!” school of comedy that I just couldn’t stand. Not all the time mind you, but enough to bother me.
I bet it’s so they don’t have to duplicate the login system for their account system or something silly like that.
“We don’t want to maintain X in two places.”
I think that’s called an expansion pack.
Why can’t they just call things what they are?
Probably because expansion packs typically cost less than a full game. They want to make it easier for themselves to get away with overcharging.
On Steam there is a different entry for MW3, that is waiting to be unlocked for installing on November 10th. It doesn’t make too much sense that this different Steam Store game (with a different game id) will also open MW2’s CoD HQ. I’ll wait and see, maybe there will also be a way to open MW3 directly.
It doesn’t make too much sense
My point exactly 😄
So with the last Steam update, the previous Call of Duty entry in Steam now launches into MW3 directly. To enter Warzone or MW2 multiplayer you will have to wait for it to start the MW2 process. It’s exactly how they did it with the MW3 beta and campaign, just viceversa, so to play MW3 MP and Warzone (starting in December) you won’t have to wait for game switching.
At some point multiple people looked at this and said:
“Yes. This is exactly how it should work”
Has anyone checked to see if Elon Musk secretly bought ActivisionBlizzard while we were all distracted with trying to stop Microsoft from doing so?
Because it TOTALLY sounds like how he’d make it work.
Pay $8 per month to give your character a blue checkmark on their helmet.
And just like on Twitter, that checkmark becomes an excellent target to aim shots at 😄
Haha Cock of Dooty blows. Imma keep crying over the turd pile of battlefield 2042
I don’t play either game myself, I just appreciate the absurdity of the situation 😄
At this point being into the MW series is basically having a humilliation fetish with a side order of findoming.
Sadly, that’s the case with most AAA games now. The shit EA and Ubisoft, to name two other examples, get away with because of owning a few extremely successful franchises with huge loyal followings is RIDICULOUS!
Do I have to download both torrents?
Dunno, my plans were already to download neither 🤷😄
Really? Your worst fear? You got nothing scarier going on in your life?
The headline is that of the article, not mine. That part only makes it funnier IMO 😄
