[Meatex]

So it came out several hours ago - who is playing and what are your thoughts?
Also put your steam name and add each other so can play together multi and spec ops

My thoughts:
im not going to compare it to the competitor (BF3) as I haven't played it. It certainly looks like a typical dice multiplayer game and lets face it - both are vastly different styles of FPS gameplay. Its like comparing counter strike with Rainbow6: Raven shield.
Also origin means bf3 will never be as popular as it could have been

Anyways. Most can probably already guess that this game is an improved version of MW2, which in some ways is good. Its instantly familiar but many small improvements are made
I haven't played it extensively yet (for me its a game best in small doses :P ) but things i have noticed

Maps: maps are a lot more complex and detailed. The design encourages constant movement as no place stays safe for long. Also they just look nice :P

Killstreaks: same ol here but one new thing is assault killstreaks versus support killstreaks
The former working as per normal but the later doesn't reset upon your death but you only have access to helpfull support bonuses like UAV or turret.

Perks: now perks feel more perky rather than... massive boost.

Campaign is still meh like the previous. Black ops still reigns supreme there

[FaDeBadger]

I haven't received mine yet, but Steam ID is Tyesh. Should be getting it the next day or two. Super pumped that it's basically MW2 fixed up a bit.

[Xenomorph]

the BF3 multiplayer is in my opinion better than MW3's. However, the campaign for MW3 is better. A lotta ppl I know share my views on this. Also, do the MW3 killstreaks seem a little off to u guys?

[x5_Potter]

Other shit to buy first, 4months til I can buy it T.T

[TADivinity]

Id love to hear any comments Re: CoD Elite?

[Zanderax]

Should I buy MW3 or BF3 if I only care about the multiplayer mode?
What features make it better then the other?

[wTlzq]

definitely BF3 IMO, i bought both MW3 and BF3
BF3- Bigger maps, more realistic weapons. teamplay slightly more important than individual skill.
but personally the jets and jumps from helicopters won me over

MW3- More variety of weapons ( advanced), individual skills more important.

Quick Comments

MooZfY:

[inFeZa]

I'm not gonna get to play for a while : Steam DL WAY to slow (13kb.s)

[iMSystem]

Stopped playing CoD when MW2 came out, it died for me
So I havn't even played Black Ops yet, not sure if I am missing out on something or not.

My guess is that I am not :P

Quick Comments

TcaTX:

Played most CoDs myself... your doing yourself a favour :D

[Meatex]

both games BF3 and MW3 are vastly different style.
My favourite fps multiplayer is still raven shield

MW3 is very frantic run and gun style with lots of customisation
BF3 isn't like that.

If you have any COD games and BF games you know what to expect from each. Get the one that suits your favourite style

[Meatex]

Black ops had the best FPS campaign in a while IMO
I couldn't play the multi cause dedicated servers are only useful if you live near one

Quick Comments

dippa:

oh dear

[iMSystem]

Originally Posted by FaDeMeatex

Black ops had the best FPS campaign in a while IMO
I couldn't play the multi cause dedicated servers are only useful if you live near one

Wait what?
So your saying you would rather play P2P then play on a dedi server in NSW when your in QLD?

[TAXanT]

Have only got BF3 so far and if I do get MW3 it won't be for a bit. I've bought every COD game since the 1st installment many many years ago but I've lost my passion for the franchise I think. Maybe it's the incredible popularity it's gotten and the know it all 14 year old 'gamers' playing it and thier attitudes. Only got BF3 because it was at a bargain price ($57) but I've still only loaded it a few times to play it.

Bring on Skyrim.

[nard]

haven't played/probably won't play mw3 but for bf3, you have vehicular control, bullet drop, bigger maps(maybe?). this of course is a very shallow and brief introduction to what bf3 multiplayer offers you. I have played mw2 and i would say they are two very different experiences and both are just as enjoyable as the other.

[Benji]

P2P was fine for casual online multiplayer, unless you're playing at the top level, you're just taking other peoples arguments and using them without any thought into whether they matter to you.

Ive got 11 min left on my install, gunna hit it up with my non nerd friends tonight after they hit the gym ^_^

[inFeZa]

Originally Posted by xGKingBenji

P2P was fine for casual online multiplayer, unless you're playing at the top level, you're just taking other peoples arguments and using them without any thought into whether they matter to you.

Ive got 11 min left on my install, gunna hit it up with my non nerd friends tonight after they hit the gym ^_^

11 mins? im so jelly, i have something like 11 DAYS of downloading

[Benji]

Originally Posted by SQLTt.inFeZa

11 mins? im so jelly, i have something like 11 DAYS of downloading

Change your steam download server to get it from USA - San Jose instead of whatever you're using now.

[iMSystem]

I was a pretty successful CoD player so its not someone else's opinion

[ToRDeathsFang]

In the couple of weeks that i played Black Ops before getting bored of it, i was getting <60ms ping to servers everywhere in Australia, so it was pretty decent. The lowest pings i got were about 27ms ping to ones that were probably close by.

[ToRsupapower]

i play on xbox one of the only who do

[Meatex]

@system - i live in Seoul Korea and usually no deciated servers here
in japan you get a couple but they are either empty, full or still 200+ ping TT

It sucks they were too lazy to police elite for pc so we only get to compete with friends - but its free so meh

[ToRsupapower]

Originally Posted by FaDeMeatex

@system - i live in Seoul Korea and usually no deciated servers here
in japan you get a couple but they are either empty, full or still 200+ ping TT

It sucks they were too lazy to police elite for pc so we only get to compete with friends - but its free so meh

wow pc gets elite for free? or i didn't understand your post,

[iMSystem]

Yea i'm not saying P2P gaming is bad at all, but for the competitive side of things, you need a dedicated server

[ToRsupapower]

Originally Posted by System

Yea i'm not saying P2P gaming is bad at all, but for the competitive side of things, you need a dedicated server

it is helpful, but it's not that needed

Quick Comments

dippa:

it really is

[Meatex]

p2p allows more people to play
and for competitive - they use xbox so can't do dedis

Elite will be free for pc but won't have any of the stuff like tournaments with prizes and stuff and no global rankings with benefits cause that would mean they would actually have to do something about cheaters

[sRFullstop]

I don't like how they don't release MW games for Mac except for CoD4 T_T

[dippa]

p2p gaming allows for idiots to just click join and find a server

for people who actually care about making sure they get a good gaming experience, dedicated servers are essential

don't forget console games use dedicated servers as well - halo 3, gears of war 3 for example - its just not as important for consoles since the most fun they get to have with modding is chipping their console.

[Meatex]

@dippa
p2p also alows people like me to actually play... at all
and saying you need dedicated servers for best gaming experience is just propaganda
If you don't like the gameplay then play something else. only logical argument for dedicated servers would be allowing people to have and mod their own servers which and given that majority of dedis aren't modded at all that point is kinda moot

[Nobunaga]

I've played a bit of both so far, and here are my thoughts. Note that I am slightly biased towards the MW franchise simply because I've played since MW2, and BF3 was the first BF game that I didn't scoff off.

Single Player:
These games aren't really built for Single Player. I haven't finished the SP for BF3 yet, because I got stuck when a ladder glitched out and crashed my (I hate glitches). I finished the MW3 campaign in 5 hours on normal, in one sitting. There were no glitches, and I have to say that it was 5 hours of pure fun. It was rather short, but the story continues on where MW2 left off, and fills up some holes from MW1 as well.

Note that in BF3, auto-aim is on unless you play on the hardest difficulty (there is no other way to turn this off).

Multiplayer:
This is probably where my bias kicks in. I'm not a big fan of games where you drive around in cars and helicopters to blow people up. Sure, it's fun but for me, it shouldn't be such a central part of the game. BF3 treats this part of the game like a real battlefield; up to 64 players fighting in huge maps doing battle things. What this leads to though, is not huge shootouts but more "I didn't see you shoot me from a mile away so now I'm dead".

You level up and gain access to new weapons and perks, but these are limited by the class that you play. There are four classes, and they level up separately. This means that if you play the Assault class exclusively, you might get lots of perks and stuff for that class, but your other 3 classes will still be at level 1.

MW3 is different. The servers are smaller, and the game is much more fast paced. The game is limited to infantry vs infantry, with kill streaks letting you control the turret of an AC130 etc. I feel that the CoD series in this regard, has gotten it perfect. The maps are the right size, with the right amount of players that you will constantly be engaged in fighting.

As you level up, you will be able to get more guns, and more perks for your character. Unlike BF3 where you are limited by the class, in this you create your own class and loadouts. You also get to pick killstreaks, things that you get when you kill a specific number of players in a row without dying which will enhance your killing potential.

The big letdown at the moment for MW3 is the dedicated server issue. Yes, there is dedicated servers but I haven't found any in Australia yet, so I'm stuck playing on IWnet.

BF3 has dedicated servers, but you have to use origins. To put it in perspective, Origins is EA's version of Steam, but instead of opening up the game when you play it, it launches a website where you download a plugin to launch the game on your computer. EA much?

I have to mention that the graphics for BF3 are simply stunning. If graphics are your thing, BF3 isn't going to disappoint. However, I find the core gameplay of MW3 more appealing.

[dippa]

Originally Posted by FaDeMeatex

@dippa
p2p also alows people like me to actually play... at all
and saying you need dedicated servers for best gaming experience is just propaganda
If you don't like the gameplay then play something else. only logical argument for dedicated servers would be allowing people to have and mod their own servers which and given that majority of dedis aren't modded at all that point is kinda moot

sigh, where to start.

dedicated servers are valuable for more reasons than just mods. they make competitive gaming possible. unlike p2p servers, you can exercise a level of control over a dedicated server.

someone being an annoying prat? you can kick or ban him from the server permanently.

don't like certain maps? you don't have to have them in the playlist.

want to make sure you have the best possible ping? join a server that you get a good connection to, as opposed to getting thrown into a lobby with americans.

if you want to play some new maps, you can add them to the dedicated server whenever you like, instead of having to wait six months to pay activision $15 for four new maps, two of which will probably be ripped out of older COD's anyway.

if you can get internet in your country, then it's also possible to have dedicated servers in your country hosted by your ISP.

saying dedicated servers improve the gaming experience isn't "propaganda" - it's a statement backed up with experience and practicality.

Quick Comments

neon:

all true.

[Meatex]

Originally Posted by dippa

sigh, where to start.

dedicated servers are valuable for more reasons than just mods. they make competitive gaming possible. unlike p2p servers, you can exercise a level of control over a dedicated server.

someone being an annoying prat? you can kick or ban him from the server permanently.

don't like certain maps? you don't have to have them in the playlist.

want to make sure you have the best possible ping? join a server that you get a good connection to, as opposed to getting thrown into a lobby with americans.

if you want to play some new maps, you can add them to the dedicated server whenever you like, instead of having to wait six months to pay activision $15 for four new maps, two of which will probably be ripped out of older COD's anyway.

if you can get internet in your country, then it's also possible to have dedicated servers in your country hosted by your ISP.

saying dedicated servers improve the gaming experience isn't "propaganda" - it's a statement backed up with experience and practicality.

All the points you make assume you have the extra cash to put into renting a server AND assuming people play on it. Most people will play on ISP run servers which are not admin-ed at all usually and will most often just run standard. Not to mention ISP's in korea simply do not host game servers - the game dev/publishers have to do that
Your point about maps doesn't exist unless the dev team also release modding tools which most do not.
Also you can have custom games where you can choose banned weapons/mods/streaks maps etc. sooo

Playing with friends you can choose a server with mid range ping rather than one being high and the other being low. But in my case its still worse with the best ping servers in existence usually 200~250 ping average.

I get much better pings with p2p and thus much better gaming experience AND i don't have to pay monthly fee and hope others will be on the server regularly

[inFeZa]

I finally had the chance to play them both and i can sum up that

+ Show +

Battlefield 3 Is much better than MW3. MW3 feels more like an expansion pack to MW2, while BF3 Feels like a fresh new game, sure they both have some negitive aspects of the game, but i just feel that BF3 has a better experience as a game then shooting dying and respawning again ala MW3.

Oh and SC2 > them both. .

[Bugalugs McScruffin]

Halo Reach > Battlefield 3 > Modern Warfare 3.



I may get Battlefield 3 at some point, but I miss the old style of games with weapons that spawn on the map. If only for this, and the fact that XP unlocks do not affect gameplay I gotta say that Reach is better than both.

[FSDarkNemesis]

Heya, is my computer that I bought with my sgd 1.2k good enough for MW3? Just to rehash:

Intel core i5 2500k. I tweaked it from 3.3 to 4.1 GHz.
8 Gb Pc 1600 MHz ddr3 RAM
NVidia Geforce GTX 550 ti (MSI Cyclone II)

[Bugalugs McScruffin]

Originally Posted by UltimateDeep

Heya, is my computer that I bought with my sgd 1.2k good enough for MW3? Just to rehash:

Intel core i5 2500k. I tweaked it from 3.3 to 4.1 GHz.
8 Gb Pc 1600 MHz ddr3 RAM
NVidia Geforce GTX 550 ti (MSI Cyclone II)

Haha, that should be fine to run it on. Maybe not Ultra graphics, but close to. The only thing that would slow it down is the 550, and as far as I'm aware they're pretty good cards.

[Meatex]

it will likely run ultra - not sure about the vid card
i got less ram and cpu and an ATI 5850 and i run on ultra fine - very smooth

[FSDarkNemesis]

Gameplay's good so far!

You Tube

You Tube

- My first CoD MW3 video!

[Bugalugs McScruffin]

Originally Posted by UltimateDeep

Gameplay's good so far!

- My first CoD MW3 video!

Haha, I like the claim in the comment of the video. :P

For $80 SGD or about US$ 65, definitely a better franchise than Battlefield.

Personally, as I stated before, Battlefield is leaps and bounds better than Call of Duty, but that's just personal opinion. Halo Reach being better than both is also personal opinion, though I believe I could successfully argue that Reach is the only one with any chance of being a competitive game.

Glad you're liking it, and good video.

EDIT: You do need to have the game sound down so we can hear you though.

[Nobunaga]

Originally Posted by Bugalugs McScruffin

Halo Reach being better than both is also personal opinion, though I believe I could successfully argue that Reach is the only one with any chance of being a competitive game.

Console FPS are lolsworthy at best!

dedicated servers are valuable for more reasons than just mods. they make competitive gaming possible. unlike p2p servers, you can exercise a level of control over a dedicated server.

You will also never have to see the "Host Migration" screen again.

[Bugalugs McScruffin]

Originally Posted by dippa

if you can get internet in your country, then it's also possible to have dedicated servers in your country hosted by your ISP.

dippa, I think you missed Meatex's point, though he did go a bit overboard as well.

Meatex's issue is the fact that he can not play on dedicated servers because there are none close enough to make it worth it. Yes, it is possible for dedicated servers to be hosted by his ISP, but this is currently not the case. I'm not sure what the state of the FPS scene is in Korea, but if it isn't big enough then ISPs aren't going to bother. P2P gives Meatex the option to play the game at all because he doesn't have access to dedicated servers with any sort of acceptable ping.

Also, sure for hardcore and competitive gamers, you get more control on a dedicated server, but the game is more than adequately playable using P2P. If the game is less popular you are more likely to get lobbies with crappy ping, but on the whole it works.

Basically I think it falls into two camps. If you just want to play the game, P2P is fine. If you want to play the game competitively, then dedicated servers all the way.

Originally Posted by Nobunaga

Console FPS are lolsworthy at best!

I guess that shows you the state of the FPS genre when the two legitimate competitive FPSs are a console title (Reach) and a 7 year old game (CS: Source). Let me know if I'm missing any, but Reach and CS: Source are better than CoD or BF by default as competitive games because they require no grind to unlock everything.

[Nobunaga]

Quake Live, CS 1.6 > Reach and Source. Source isn't even legitimately competitive.

[Bugalugs McScruffin]

Haha. I don't follow the scene much, so I don't know whether they are considered competitive or not. I was just saying that Reach and Source have the chance to be considered competitive, where as BF3 and CoD do not.

Quake Live is just Quake 3: Arena running in a browser, right? Or have a I missed something?

My point still remains. CS 1.6 is 8 years old. Quake Live is based on an 11-year-old game. Where are the current games that are going to take their place?

[iMSystem]

Never played cod 2?
That was the sickest competitive game, and the best Cod game out still to date

[Bugalugs McScruffin]

Haha, CoD 2 was fun, though it had died by the time I had it and Live, so...

[Nobunaga]

I heard CoD 4 is still played as well.

[Bugalugs McScruffin]

Originally Posted by Nobunaga

I heard CoD 4 is still played as well.

CoD 4 fails the same competitive games test that the CoD game after it does. Funnily enough CoD 2 doesn't.

[Nobunaga]

CoD 4 has dedicated so everything can be unlocked.

[Bugalugs McScruffin]

Originally Posted by Nobunaga

CoD 4 has dedicated so everything can be unlocked.

And boom CoD 4 is a competitive game. I wondered if this was the case. What about MW3?

[Nobunaga]

Originally Posted by Bugalugs McScruffin

And boom CoD 4 is a competitive game. I wondered if this was the case. What about MW3?

MW3 has unranked dedicated servers, which is enough for a competitive scene.

[Bugalugs McScruffin]

Originally Posted by Nobunaga

MW3 has unranked dedicated servers, which is enough for a competitive scene.

A game doesn't have to be strictly competitive to develop a competitive scene. Just look at Smash Bros.

If you can not unlock all gear using a dedicated server in MW3 (I'm assuming you can, since you could in MW1) then it would fail the test of a strictly competitive game.

[Nobunaga]

Originally Posted by Bugalugs McScruffin

A game doesn't have to be strictly competitive to develop a competitive scene. Just look at Smash Bros.

If you can not unlock all gear using a dedicated server in MW3 (I'm assuming you can, since you could in MW1) then it would fail the test of a strictly competitive game.

It's arguable that any game game can be considered competitive.

WoW PVP is competitive (even though I do not agree), and that has item restrictions.

[iMSystem]

Originally Posted by Nobunaga

CoD 4 has dedicated so everything can be unlocked.

Not to mention weapon balances and a whole shit ton of stuff that makes games competitive.

[Benji]

From my point of view, I just love it because I can grab a few friends, join a game quickly and have some fun. Not everything needs to be 100% serious :P

Quick Comments

Bugalugs McScruffin:

Benji wins the thread!!! You don't have to play competitively. :D

[Bugalugs McScruffin]

Strict competition assumes a fair playing field. If you have unlocks the playing field is inherently unfair. Therefore, in the strictest sense some games can not be considered competitive games. Doesn't mean they can't develop a competitive scene, but they've already got a strike against them from a design perspective.

[Meatex]

everyone is assuming any pro player isn't going to have everything unlocked by the time they go into any competitive match
This is also ignoring the fact that you can create custom games with whatever weapons you choose whether or not you've unlocked them in most (i believe all) of those style of games.

[TcaTX]

Well... I am part of a still thriving Cod4 clan. Most of us are mature age players and even have some members that are 60+

CoD in generall is no where near as competitive as Sc2 in the Global sense, but it is still competitive. Our clan competes in scrims on the cybergamer ladder still these days and alot of other clans still do too! Cod 4 ain't dead, and it can be competitive. TBH I thought this thread would be about members thoughts on the game, not a debate about the competitive side of it =/.

I enjoy Mw3, but am disappointed by the p2p matchmaking and while dedicated servers are in, they are unranked! Must admit while most maps are hard to snipe on, the sniping is quite fun and its good Qucik scopes are back after the terrible disaster of Black ops! The ump45 is back from Mw2 and is still fairly boss, while the spas 12 shotty ('s me shotty) is a let down (Sandy Ravage's absolute pwnage with it probably caused it >.<), but hopefully the model 1887 is still good and akimbo ready!

[Meatex]

shotguns are heaps good
especially on maps like hard hat

[Nobunaga]

Akimbo FMG9s are the new shotguns.

[Benji]

I'm still using my M16A4 after falling in love with it in MW2 (with stopping power :O) but theres no more stopping power, so its no longer a 1 burst kill

[Bugalugs McScruffin]

I want my G36C back.

[Meatex]

i miss the famas from MW2 TT
I picked the first assault rifle and sticking with it for now. don't know about other weapons

[Benji]

You gotta try the 3 burst rifles, makes you feel more pro when getting kills ^_^

I remember using the 1 shot rifle (non automatic) from MW2 (was it the FAR?) and everytime I got a kill I felt like a goddamn god, the thing was dead accurate too, was awesome.

[Meatex]

yeah i liked that gun but hated that it was kinda wonky with the acog scope.
And yeah 3 shot burst fire is pro - i burst fire anyway
Want to try some other weapons but don't wanna waste time on unlocking weapon stuff for the gun i already put a lot of work into :S

[Benji]

Red dot or just use iron sights with FMJ imo.

Man I really needa start testing out more of the MW3 guns :P But I really wanna finish up my 1k kills with my M16A4 first :P

[Meatex]

im currently only lvl20
slowly starting to figure out the maps
others?

[Bugalugs McScruffin]

Haha Meatex. I should check if I ever got to lvl 20 in Black Ops.

Red dot is generally better than ACOG. The maps aren't big enough to make an ACOG matter.

[Benji]

I am somewhere between 35 and 40, Been playing domination 80% of the time, with 20% TDM and I've got a handle on all of the maps, although I needa figure out the smart way to play them all. I've also got no clue on other maps that arent part of the Dom/TDM map pool.

I'm also a big fan of the holographic sight, just feels more natural to me :P

[RippuL]

The Type-95 is AMAAAAAAAAAZING. Just use that with any attachment and you should be good to go.

[Nobunaga]

Is everyone playing on PC or console?

[Meatex]

PC here
i have only played TDM so far and i think some of the maps have only come up once in my play time so don't know them all well.
Some I know decently. I miss silent, unlimited sprint with knife and silenced ump as well :P

[Nobunaga]

If everyone is on PC, we can all team up on steam and roll people.

[Meatex]

I might be able to play with guys in SG but almost certainly will be too laggy to play with guys in Aus. for me anyway TT

[FSDarkNemesis]

Wow, Campaign is actually really short this time. But Enjoyed it. But Soap McTavish Died!

[FSDarkNemesis]

Hey guys! Started my Multiplaying Spree on MW3, now Level 40 after a week or so of playing. And here's something for the LOLs of it. Something I have submitted for Machinima Respawn's Anoj Top Ten.

You Tube

You Tube

[Aean(:]

played this game for 10 minutes. motion sickness got the best of me - felt like vomiting. guess ill be sticking to sc2.

[JordsKeen]

Jus' got this Meat ^_^ keen to play bro?!

[Intoccabile19]

Hey Guys,

If you dont like the run and gun/spawn, die crap that COD has become you can still get into good competative but fun games by going into the settings and enabling the server browser. You can then filter by hardcore and search and destroy and get some good servers. This makes the game much better for me becuase I'm really not a fan of running and gunning from the hip spray and pray. i prefer a level playing field and relying on my skill more than my level.

I also recommend Search and Destroy to anyone who enjoys a more comptetative game because your life actually matters in this. Once you die in S&D you stay dead for the round. This means that people arent just running around shooting at shit without a care about dying. You have to use teamwork and strategy to win the round.

This is all my personal opinion. I realise that run and gun team deathmatch and stuff have become more popular. But I dont have alot of time to play games and I hate when I jump into a game and everyone there has 50 levels on me and simply because they have more time to play the game they are given an advantage in the way of equipment. I feel skill is less important in those types of games.

[Bugalugs McScruffin]

Originally Posted by Intoccabile19

Hey Guys,

If you dont like the run and gun/spawn, die crap that COD has become you can still get into good competative but fun games by going into the settings and enabling the server browser. You can then filter by hardcore and search and destroy and get some good servers. This makes the game much better for me becuase I'm really not a fan of running and gunning from the hip spray and pray. i prefer a level playing field and relying on my skill more than my level.

I also recommend Search and Destroy to anyone who enjoys a more comptetative game because your life actually matters in this. Once you die in S&D you stay dead for the round. This means that people arent just running around shooting at shit without a care about dying. You have to use teamwork and strategy to win the round.

This is all my personal opinion. I realise that run and gun team deathmatch and stuff have become more popular. But I dont have alot of time to play games and I hate when I jump into a game and everyone there has 50 levels on me and simply because they have more time to play the game they are given an advantage in the way of equipment. I feel skill is less important in those types of games.

Eh, the levels don't matter that much. Once you are ~level 5 or 6 you can take on anyone.

As for the Hardcore Search & Destroy, definitely. I tend to find that objective modes in general are better experiences than Team Deathmatch. Just watch out because it may end up like Halo, where there is a small number of people who only play a certain playlist (ie. Team Snipers in Halo) and they get insanely good at that small portion of the game. I don't think this happens nearly as much in CoD, but just something to be aware of.

[Meatex]

i played both modes in MW2 but have been sticking with TDM in MW3 for now
Usually I want to just jump in and lol around for a couple of maps then jump out and play scc2 or skyrim :P