N-Space, the developer charged with making the Nintendo DS version of Modern Warfare 3 has slammed popular online gaming site Kotaku and The Official Nintendo Magazine for publishing disparaging reviews about the game.
The official Nintendo Magazine of UK gives CoD:MW3:D a 70%. Apparently we get marked down for “not being ready to take the step up to 3DS yet.” I’m always amazed by how poorly game journalists understand the industry they work in. Oh, and Kotaku can suck it.
I agree when he says game journalists don’t know the industry they work in.
i also agree ^^^^
MATURITY.
It’s very unprofessional…
inb4peoplesay “HERP DERP COD SUX NINT IS R BETTR THAN SONY AND MICROSTF AND THEIR COD SHIT!11!11!”
I feel as though you are angry about people who prefer Nintendo and dislike Call of Duty. That’s a little unfair, I’d say. Perhaps some people think that first person shooters like CoD are poisoning the gaming world.
More and more, kids around 12 are playing FPS games and completely writing off Nintendo games as baby stuff. This generation seems to think that if a game is not full of guns, blood, violence, and/or shouting swear words while playing online, it’s stupid baby crap that should be ignored. It seems as if the only people who pay any attention to quality Nintendo games anymore are the people who grew up during the N64 days and young children. It is most pitiable.
There’s that, plus the fact that FPS games are released left and right, particularly CoD, which has a new game pretty much each year, and it’s essentially the same thing with one unique aspect. I know people who could just play the first Modern Warfare game and be happy with it. Nintendo’s in the opposite direction on that one because each year, something new comes out, whether it be a new Kirby, Metroid, Donkey Kong, Mario Kart, etc.
You shouldn’t be so mad about the fact that there are gamers out there who actually have depth to their gaming tastes. It’s the kind of thing that makes a gamer look shallow, which should be especially unwelcome on this website.
Ummm new Mario,Zelda etc??? CoD???
Lol all games follow the same concept… no onl COD but nearly all games… especially Mario and Zelda which both always revolve around a princess…
let’s not get stupid here. mario and zelda games are much more different from each other than first person shooters. halo and cod are like red delicious apples and granny smith apples, and mario and zelda are like a bullfrog and a bulldog. the point here is that these 2 fps games seem kinda different at first (sci-fi type warfare and more realistic warfare) but end up being pretty similar, then mario and zelda games seem similar at first (the whole princess-saving deal) and end up being entirely different
I always see more mature people play Zelda.
When i go on COD, all i hear is 10 year old kids on high prostege swearing and screaming down mics
Adults understand that Zelda is a great game as its adventure and non repetitive.
Kids say COD is the best because of its violence and swearing.
COD IS THE MOST REPETITIVE GAME EVER! ONE OBJECTIVE. KILL….
I would even prefer Zelda over COD.
We also “kill” in Zelda. But at least, in my mind, I don’t think of it as violence. Haha.
saying “even prefer” is very degrading!!! I would ALWAYS prefer Zelda over COD……….hell, even World of Goo is better than COD…..
I’ll change it for you. I would ALWAYS prefer Zelda over COD and other adventure games out there….
I’m a teen but still hates military FPS (except Crysis ofcourse XD) I’ve have played games since I was born nothin has ever pleased me more than Nintendo. The FPSs released nowadays are exactly like you say, ” What’s new about that?” “Oh, this time we kill vietnamese!!”…….They have no moderate storyline (None if you ask me), No outstanding elements, nothing creative, just kill kill kill, I mean even though Farmville shouldnt exist, its still better than CoD. But I never understood why everybody is so crazy about them??? Games like Kirby, mario are not that appreciated as much as they should be by this generation. For me, Nintendo is the Apple of consoles and the God of Games. It invented and reformed gaming, their motive was not business but to actually deploy the best product to the consumers. Thats why the Wii is still more popular than PS3 and X360, PSP could never beat the 3DS ever(nor Vita, even though it has better graphics, you can only do so much with a handheld, which the 3DS excels in using every aspect of it)
Thank u!
i agree with the whole kotaku can suck it, but everything else is pretty accurate. you cant take a polished turd and put it on the wii.
About time someone told Kotaku to suck to be fair. Not a fan of COD but I still give respect.
Glad to see N-Space is using the utmost of maturity with their comments.
They mad
Well, maybe so, but MW3 would have looked much better on 3DS over the DS.
It wasn’t their decision to put the game on DS, it was Activision’s. They wanted to do a 3DS version but Activision wants lots of 0’s, even if it means 0’s in the review, too. There are more people who own a DS than there are people with 3DS’s, so naturally Activision stands to gain more if they make it for an older system at a fraction of the cost.
Ah, yes, how could I forget Activision’s greedy little schemes? Perhaps they will reconsider when the 3DS becomes the next greatest handheld.
Even then, you have to review the game on the platform it is. You can’t rate it down for not being on a different platform…
Wouldent Blame em, The DS versions of Call of duty arent that good
Smooth. You made a FPS for the Nintendo DS. Of course it’s going to suck. No FPS on the DS to date has been worth it. And then you go and bash Kotaku? If you can’t take criticism, you shouldn’t be in the entertainment industry.
metroid was good. But every cod i’ve played on DS was awful. beyond awful, and would deserve a far lower score.
Metroid is an FPA, not an FPS.
Dang, so Nobody likes those sevens to be at the start of a rating huh?
real mature. at least a 70 is passable
But they were unfairly marked down for something out of their control – Activision ordered them to make it for DS. The reviewers insulted the team’s abilities based on assumptions. Look at it in that light and you’ll see the other side of the argument wasn’t much more mature at all.
only to be offended by something to actually be offended about (theres a reason WHY it got its score) and 70% isnt bad, who got sand up his vagina?
The reason it got it’s score was because it wasn’t on the 3ds. Kotaku directly criticised the developer, and marked them down for something that was out of the developer’s hands.
So professional. I’m sure this will net them thousands of job offers moving forward. I’d certainly want them representing my franchise if I owned one.
… The fuck? When did 70 stop being a good score? That’s a First in university grading, FFS.
Highest amount of maturity since that picture of Reggie Fils-Aime riding Mario’s Kart. JK Reggie you know we love you.
The game sucks ass regardless. It would have only looked better on the 3DS; but the terrible gameplay wouldn’t have changed.
That’s very very very very unprofessional of N-Space. Also, a game made for the big screen should stay there. No FPS on the DS has been any equivalent to it’s console partners. Of course, it was going to happen anyway, but still, don’t make comments like that.
Since when was 70 even a bad score? espescially considering it’s an FPS on the DS, which idiot came up with that idea? and anyway no sane person ever takes ONM reviews seriously.
Why buy a shitty version on a handheld console with no good online service? Isn’t CoD about online?
it’s online is actully pretty good, no console version, but fun for a handheld and i think it’s worth teh py.
If they seriously released Modern Warfare 3 for DS and not 3DS, then they deserve this flamewar. Nobody wants to play a new cutting-edge game with shittier-than-N64-style graphics.
DS is like, a small step above N64 actually.
REALLY SMALL
I think you’ll find that it’s not, apart from the size of the cartridges, otherwise all the good n64 games would have been on the ds instead of just mario
Surprised? I did it for three years and I understand the beast completely–it’s not really that hard to grasp.
Hmmm they bash someone for making a bad review. Sounds like almost everyone on this site when SS got a bad review and yes 7 is bad. Any AAA title should be 8.5-10. 8 is like borderline failing.
Makes me respect insomniac games more. Ratchet and clank all 4 one got a 4/10 and they sent a letter to the reviewer thanking him for pointing out all the flaws.
Wow, really!? I didn’t know that, Insomniac is awesome then! I’d assume every R&C game got like an 11 but it’s nice to know not every game company is run by whiney 12 year olds.
Congratulations N-Space, you now make me want to play MW3 even less because of your douchebaggery.
Love nintendo, never seen anything from kotaku but i love them because of this trollolol god it must have sucked
….HE IS MY HERO
Such professionalism.
Poor execution and a level of immaturity a respectable publisher shouldn’t possess, sprinkled with lack of professionalism makes this valid statement about Kotaku a ranty whiny bitch’s complaint. Kotaku does suck, this is general common knowledge in the gaming world (it’s the Perez Hilton of gaming), but being a dick (no pun intended) about it doesn’t make you any better. Tact over twat, I always say.
This is like the Joystic/Conduit thing all over again.
God Forbid that a call of duty game gets a low score, while its ok for nintendo games to score low due to “being unoriginal”
I think people are misunderstanding the meaning of reviews, and what the scores mean. A review is designed to let you know more about the game to help you decide if it’s worth buying or not. The score is just a guideline – it’s your personal opinion that decides if you should buy it. If you don’t mind the cons, but think the pros would be awesome, you should probably buy it, even if the score is a 6.
People also seem to think that in order for a game to be considered “good”, it has to get a score of at LEAST 9.5, or sometimes 10, remember “The Great Twilight Princess 9.5 Reaction”? They forget that this is what the scores really mean:
10 – It can’t possibly get any better, something that cannot happen, as there is always room for improvement.
9 – a truly excellent game, definitely one to consider buying.
8 – A great game, don’t be afraid to buy it.
7 – Good, but could be better. Read the review before buying.
6 – Decent, try renting it first.
5 – okay, only consider buying if you really think it deserves a better score.
4 – Not very good, probably shouldn’t buy.
3 – A badly flawed game, not recommended.
2 – A terrible game, skip it.
1 – One of the worst games around, don’t even think about trying it unless you do it for the sole purpose of laughing at how bad it is.
0 – It can’t possibly get any worse, once again impossible, as it can always get worse somehow.
So I think that someone giving the game a 70% is perfectly legitimate, and completely up to them.
Cool story bro. No really, this is helpful.
I lol’d.
“The official Nintendo Magazine of UK gives CoD:MW3:D a 70%.”
I think that’s good.
“Apparently we get marked down for “not being ready to take the step up to 3DS yet.” I’m always amazed by how poorly game journalists understand the industry they work in.”
I agree.
“Oh, and Kotaku can suck it.”
I lol’d
Kotaku deserves to suck it. I don’t see why n-space is angry, they shouldn’t have expected much from a COD game on the DS anyways.
Now that’s a heading <3 LoL
Does it matter? It’s got Call of Duty in the title so it’ll probably sell well anyways. I can sympathise about the no- 3DS thing. That’s being kinda picky.
Lol The developers sound like idiots, exactly like the dumbed-down game they made. Lololol
N-Space, they’re just doing their jobs. It’s their role to criticize, with the cons to be used for future games’ improvements if possible. A rating of 70% is not bad. Can be better but its at least passable and average. Get over it.
A CoD game gets low score? Zslda Skyward Sword get a low score THAT’S something to start a flamewar about…
You don’t see Nintendo telling Gamespot to ‘suck it’ after their 7.5 review of Skyward Sword do you?
The people who made MW3 are as mature as the people who play it? Makes sense.
Activision is just dumb for not thinking the 3DS is better then the DS in many ways.
Activision learned a lesson and their going to put COD on Wii U.
N-Space isn’t angry at the bad reviews, they’re angry at the fact that they were marked down for not creating CoD for the 3DS. Which was out of their hands because Activision controls the IP not them. Do a little research before mocking a great video-game developer. Also sickr, please interpret articles correctly, this isn’t the first time I’ve seen you get something totally wrong. It’s not good and shows poor journalistic skills.
Yeah, I’m also upset that sickr didn’t even mention that n-space doesn’t decide what platform they develop call of duty for, even though they already posted an entire article about it
N-Space, problem? -trollface-
Why the hell is everyone on here bashing N-space by calling them immature? Wouldn’t you be pissed if your game got a bad score just because of the system it was made for? Keep in mind N-space DOESN’T GET TO CHOOSE WHAT SYSTEM IT MAKES GAMES FOR
Get stuffed N-Space!!!
Official Nintendo Magazine have the right to their own opinion just like you!!
And i personally would never write a good review about extremity games like this!!
LOL they mad?
To all you people saying 70 isn’t even a bad score, look how you reacted when that Gamestop reviewer rated skyward sword 7.5/10…
I don’t know about Kotaku’s issue, but the 3DS comment was kind of dumb. Activision paid N-Space to make a port for the DS, not the 3DS. They only did what they were asked for on a system that was targeted to by the employer. They even said that when people started asking them to make a 3DS port.
Pingback: Nintendo DS x Call of Duty MW3