Sane Hedrone wrote:
Edit - if you like what this thread says, leave a comment. It will help the thread stay on the front page longer, and have a better chance for the devs to read it, which is the whole purpose of this thread.
Edit - if you want to respond to something within the post, thats fine, I'm more than happy to read those. But please don't quote the entire OP. Its way too long.
English isn't my first language, so forgive any grammatical errors.
This is a compilation of what I feel Black ops needs/should implement it to make it a great game that MW2 should've been and more. As I think of more, or someone else brings up something that I like, I will add it to this thread.
-quality, not quantity
-fair and balanced gameplay
-Local search/social preferences
Overall Weapon (+attachments) balance
-recoil and idle sway...
-Heart Beat sensors
-Burst fire weapons
Perks and Deathstreaks
-Care packages/emergency airdrops
-KS reward kills
-Bolt action rifles
-Accurate in game stats
This will be long. Lets begin.
Firstly, I created this account on these forums for the sole purpose of giving you guys my opinions on what black ops needs in terms of a game, First person shooter, and a call of duty game. I started my COD career with COD4, and to this day I consider that game the greatest game ever made, flat out. It had flaws, many, and to deny them would be blasphemy, but overall, I would say that was my favorite game, ever.
I was active on the IWF (infinityward's forums) since late October o f '09. My hopes was that I could give infinityward the feedback they needed to make MW2 the game COD4 was and more. They didn't. In fact, they did the exact opposite. They made a game that I would say is the worst game to have ever hit the genre of FPS games. Not just in the sense that they messed up COD4s perfect formula, but that they messed up the formula for any First person shooter game.
I'm not going to lie, I feel very passionate about this game, video games in general, but especially this game. And thats ultimately why I am writing up this detailed list of what I feel Black ops needs to implement. And, I feel like it will actually mean something this time. When I wrote up something for infinityward, I felt like I was writing to a child.
And that brings me to my next point. Treyarch, you have a lot of potential to make yourself into the next "Barack Obama" if you will. A once loved developer has **** out something that people truly hate, and as a result, many people are counting on you to fix the problems infinityward has made, and make Call of Duty the game it once was, a truly excellent game.
People hate MW2! You have commentators, people payed to play Modern Warfare 2, literally swearing out the game. People like blametruth, xcalizorz who swear out the game. People like Wingsofredemption who openly admit they hate the game, even them posting videos about issues that ruin the game. Just look at the comments to Youtube videos, or even the IWF. People that aren't 12 years old truly despise this game to its core, or have a strong feeling towards it in regards to its issues. No other game is more broken.
Now let me clarify, everything I go over in this post won't necessarily be the result of MW2. Some things I feel need to be added, and I have felt needed to be added before W@W was released. For example, many matchmaking features I feel would've made COD4 a better game, but its never too late to start.
Another thing I want to mention is, throughout this post, I will give detailed instructions as to what I feel you guys should do with particular gameplay elements (like burst guns). I'm not trying to run your company. All I care about is that you address the issue I'm bringing up. If I suggest a fix, its because I feel that would be a good fix. Not necessarily that its the only one.
Alright, lets begin.
Matchmaking for any game is important. Lets make it superior for Black ops.
Quality, not quantity
More or less, I mean quality, not speed, but you get the idea. I understand speed is important to many, but quality is just as important. I realize dedicated servers aren't exactly available for consoles, and thats fine. I do want to stress though, if dedicated servers were issued to consoles for this game, it would make this game superior to every other console game on the market in terms of matchmaking, which given the amount of FPS games that have been given a lot of hype, thats saying A LOT.
Either way, we want good connections. I'd rather wait 1 minutes to be put into a game where everyone is green bars, than not wait at all and be put into a game where I am three bars, no joke.
Call of Duty as a game is so centered around connection. Because you die so quickly, often times someone with a faster connection, regardless if they have host or not (although host definetly helps) will have a significantly greater chance of winning any of his engagements, and its sad. Do you really want a game that rewards whoever has the fastest connection? Obviously, someone who invests more will get more, but in Call of Duty, the slightly faster connection makes a huge difference. A good host selection system is crucial. So crucial in fact, that if I were to write up a strategy guide for Call of Duty, the very first thing I would go over is that you need to have a superior connection. Better connection equates to better performance.
Fair and balanced gameplay
You want money. We get it. Its no secret. Everyone wants money. Your not into this because you love us so much, or because you want to make a video game a really good game for the sake of a good game. And we also understand that a way many devs get money is by making their games noob friendly, so more people will buy the game.
Theres a better way, that won't frustrate anybody (because lets be honest, martyrdom frustrated a lot of bad players in COD4).
Skill based matchmaking. One of the things that makes halo such a great success, and such a fun game, is that it matches you with people your skill level. I can count the number of times I have had a game that has come down to the wire, whether it be in kills or domination points, since my days of COD4 in 2007, on one hand. Thats not an exaggeration. Thousands of games, hundreds of hours, and less than 6 games have actually been close games, where I looked at the scoreboard and said "Wow, I need to grab that flag ASAP", or something like that.
Every game I play, I either decimate the other team with a landslide victory, or my team loses in a landslide victory for the other team. I have played games where I completely dominate the other team, because the skill gap between the two of us is so massive. And the same happened to me when I was first starting out.
A skill based matchmaking system would reward everybody. Bad players would love it, because they wouldn't feel so bad. Good players would love it, because they wouldn't have to put up with teammates that suck utter donkey dick, and everybody would love it because games would be more face paced, more fun, more challenging. Don't you want people turning off their ps3/xbox saying "Wow, tonight was a fun night". Because I can tell you, I've never said that once for as long as I've played MW2.
Local Search/Social preferences
These are both small, but I feel they need to be mentioned. I'm sure you guys will include local search, since you did for W@W. But social preferences I also feel would be a warm welcome to this game.
I encounter four types of people when I play. People that don't talk, people that are egotistical, and people that complain about my killing them with something stupid (like an Uzi, or a hardscope), and people who are polite. I only want to play with the quite/polite people. And yet that rarely happens. Let us have a more enjoyable time playing, give us social preferences.
We love customization. One of the foundations for COD4 and beyond was that you could customize how you played. Let us customize how we matchmake. Let us social preferize, choose whether we want the best possible connection, the one that will pair us up best with skill, or one that will give me the fastest game to jump into, because I just want to play.
Let us choose the maps we like and don't like. Whether it be how BFBC2 does it, or an automated system that reads how often you veto a certain map, or where we just say "I want to play on these maps, and not on these ones". I'm going on a bit of a tangent here, and I'm really just throwing out ideas, but I feel they would make this game a helluva lot more fun if we had this kind of customization and preference options at our disposal.
This game is going to have a huge fanbase, so lets give us a lot of playlist options.
Firstly, there needs to be a Mercenary option for every gamemode. So, for example, I click on a playlist, and then I select *Mercenary* from a drop down menu, or something of the sort. So if I'm playing with friends, I can say *regular* to the system, and it will match me up with people who chose *regular* for that gamemode I chose, and if I want to lone wolf it, then I select *Mercenary*. You get the idea.
I also feel hardcore should be implemented the same way. So I click on SND, select whether I want core or hardcore, and then select whether I want mercenary or regular.
Again, this isn't well thought out, and I understand if you guys can't implement this, but it would be a warm welcome addition to the game.
I feel this needs to be implemented into this game. I can't stress this enough. MW2 would be a very enjoyable game if this playlist had been implemented, and given my stance on that game, that it saying quite a bit. There either needs to be specific barebones playlists, or a barebones options for playlists like what I mentioned just above this section.
For those who don't know, barebones is a playlist where everything accept the gun, and equipment is stripped of the player, so its just you and your gun left to get kills.
Overall Weapon (+attachments) Balance
I feel weapon balance is what ruined W@W and MW2, and made COD4 for me. Its a huge thing, and if a developer can achieve it, its a great accomplishment, and a great game.
Recoil and Idle Sway...
...Are a nessecity. Simple as that. Every weapon should have idle sway, to prohibit it from sniping (unless its a sniper, in which case idle sway only serves to make it more difficult), and if there isn't Idle sway on every weapon, there should, at the very least, every automatic assault rifle & SMG should have idle sway. We don't want ACR and Scars. We want COD4 M4 carbines, or W@W STG 44s. We don't want a game ruled by assault rifles. We want a diverse game where every weapon fills its own niche, and no weapon is useless.
Assault rifles dominate MW2, because they almost all lack sufficient recoil and Idle sway to make them not effective at event he longest of ranges. If you were to ask me what my favorite sniper rifle is, I would answer the ACR. It IS a sniper rifle.
I really can't stress this enough. COD4 almost got it perfect. And, W@W got it down very well as well. Nobody ever sniped with an STG, or an M4, or an ak47. Only the most elite of players were able to do so.
Use your judgment, and balance it as necessary. But they must be included. I truly cannot say this enough. There shouldn't be any ACR or Scar Hs or Tar 21s (or dare I say, UMPs). There should be ak47s, F2000s, FALs, you get the idea. Keep the guns easy to use (the M4 in COD4 and the mp40 in W@W were easy to use), but make sure they have some amount of sway and recoil.
They need a HUGE overhaul. Its crucial for both primary weapon balance, and the skill an complexity of the game that Shotguns, machine pistols, and launchers be completely redone.
Shotgun secondaries need to go, period. Shotguns should be primary weapons. They are as strong as a primary weapon, and therefore they belong in that slot. Whats the point of using an SMG, if you can have an AR (mid-long range superiority) and a shotgun (close range superiority)? The question is rhetorical. SMGs in MW2 (save the UMP) are practically useless, when an AR/LMG + shotgun have way more versatility and effectiveness. And there is no penalty.
You also need to consider, players shouldn't be able to do everything. In any FPS game, one of the core balancing factors that is applied to weapons is that there was incentive for the weapon to not be used. Shotgun secondaries remove this balancing factor completely. Why not use a sniper rifle, since its close range disadvantages mean nothing when you have a shotgun. The point is, people shouldn't have infinite versatility, and shotgun secondaries do just that. Not only that, but it takes away from many strategies that could be involved otherwise. Now, I can't sneak up and fight the sniper on his weak spot (CQB), because he doesn't have a weak spot. Shotgun secondaries make everyone a super soldier, and its not the way a game is suppose to be played. There needs to be skill involved.
That also brings me to machine pistols. They need to be removed, flat out. They are just as effective at close range as SMGs, and in the case of the m93 or pp2k, they are supper effective at medium-long range, more so than other assault rifles. If their made primaries, they will just be useless, so they simply need to be removed.
And now I'm at launchers. Because handguns and launchers will be all that remains, launchers will become overused, and abused, and overpowered. Therefore, launchers can't be secondary weapons. Otherwise everyone will have their own grenade launcher (which will be another point I make about the grenade launcher), and it will just nullify why shotguns and machine pistols were taken away. Imagine if everyone was using explosives, constantly (you probably already can, its called ground war). There would be no point to cover, no point to shooting your gun. The game would just become frustrating.
Launchers could take up a first perk slot (like they did in COD4 & W@W), or they could simply be primary weapons, I don't know. But they CANNOT be secondary weapons. That is my first suggestion.
My second suggestion, is that you add speed into the equation. So, keep shotguns and machine pistols and launchers the way they are, but give them appropriate speed penalties. It makes sense that a soldier carrying an Assault Rifle and a shotgun would be slower than a soldier carrying an Assault rifle and a handgun.
I'm just throwing out numbers, but essentially, lets say when you equip a machine pistol as your secondary weapon, you get a 3% speed decrease. So if I'm using an SMG, and I'm using a machine pistol secondary, then I move at 97% speed.
I don't think the penalty should exist for launchers that can only shoot down air support (like the stinger missiles in MW2) but its a thought.
I feel this is the biggest issue MW2 has. In fact, I would say MW2 would be infinitely more enjoyable if Grenade launchers weren't as powerful as they were. While I won't be writing up as much as I did with secondary weapons, I feel the Grenade launcher issue is a lot more important.
Treyarch, I'm going to make this plain and simple. Grenade Launchers ruin Modern Warfare 2. They make the game unplayable at times. They need to be given a HUGE nerf.
Grenade launchers are the frags from COD4, times ten. Every game, they are spammed across the map for easy cheap unavoidable kills. They are so frequent, I see people spawn, and immediately switch to their grenade launcher. They are better than primary weapons. Easy to use, extremely effective, and they have no limit. They make cover absolutely redundant, and force you to play absolute stealth. They are the epitome of game ruining elements. No other First person shooter, or any video game for that matter, has such an extreme over usage of something that isn't even a gun in the first place.
And I'm not just talking about the people who only use grenade launchers the entire match. I'm talking about people who use the grenade launcher period. I've seen people bling their guns with a site and noob tube, only to only use their noob tube. Its ridiculously unfair. It turns **** players into great players, and great players into demi gods.
I have gotten ridiculously cheap scores, easily, with Grenade launchers. I have put players are my complete mercy when I'm using grenade launchers. Its cheap, its unfair, its flat out frustrating. I have never gotten so furious over a video game before I played MW2 and its all powerful grenade launcher.
The way I look at it, you have two (+ one) options for making grenade launchers fair and balanced.
Option 1 - you remove the grenade launcher, period. It doesn't add anything to the game other than frustration. Even in COD4 and W@W, dying by one was incredibly cheap. But at least it was manageable, and barely anyone used it.
Option 2 - Make grenade launchers take up either your first perk slot, your second perk slot, or your third perk slot (of any other perk slots their might be). It worked in COD4 and W@W. As to why infinityward made that initial change is baffling.
Option 3 - I put this in parentheses because it may or may not be applicable to this game. Make noob tubes take up your secondary weapon slot. If handguns are the only secondaries, then this won't work. So unless you decide to go with my speed reduction idea, or some other secondary weapon nerf, or you keep the system the same (something you shouldn't do), then having the grenade launcher take up your secondary weapon slot would be perfect.
Honestly, they ruin the game. The biggest make or break of Black Ops for me will be if noob tubes are allowed to be spammed to the degree of with which they are in MW2, or any degree at all for that matter.
They need to be removed. Their built in wall hacks, and just like grenade launchers, amplify a players skill beyond that of what it actually is. There shouldn't be such an item that makes bad players good immediately, ever.
I'm aware there was a counter for Heart beat sensors, but you were forced to use that counter if another player was using Heart beat sensors.
I don't want to be forced to use a specific perk just because my enemy decides to equip one attachment, and therefore I either put myself at an extreme disadvantage, or I give up my third perk slot. (lets be honest, which is worth more, a perk slot, or your attachment).
Just remove them. They weren't a warm welcome to the game anyways.
Burst fire weapons
I don't know how you plan to implement certain weapons into a burst role or not, I don't know how you plan to balance out the burst weapons. But do not make burst weapons like they were and are in COD4 and MW2. Those guns dominate all competitive play. They are the best guns in the game. (The only exception in MW2 being the UMP, which I don't think I have to mention you guys shouldn't make).
If you do decide to implement burst weapons into your game, you have two options for balancing them out.
-shitload of sway/recoil
-headshots not withstanding, no one burst kills w/out stopping power.
Seriously, the m16 dominated gamebattles, European tournaments, etc. in COD4. And the m16/Famas (and the UMP) dominate all competitive play in MW2. They are the best guns in the game. Its not a matter of skill equalization. The guns are just too damn effective. Shotguns at close range, snipers at long range. Fast TTK, good mobility, exceptional versatility. One of the two options implemented would make them useful, but still keep them balanced.
I'm not talking about commando, that's a different issue. I'm talking about the regular knife. It needs nerfing. The knife is suppose to be a last resort, and yet I find players using it, even without commando, all the time is a cqb weapon. The lung is 128 units I believe, which is too much. The knife in COD4 and W@W was perfect. They were last resort weapons, and not an actual weapon people would use.
Whether you remove the lung, or just nerf the lung, knifing I feel as a whole needs to be toned down.
This isn't medieval warfare, this isn't civil warfare, this isn't WWI. The knife is a last resort, not a CQB weapon of its own.
Perks and Deathstreaks
Again, a great addition to this game. But they do need critiquing.
Just remove them. The only deathstreak that I think is a genuinely good idea and should stay is copycat. Every other deathstreak needs to go. Painkiller doesn't prevent spawn trapping, fixing the spawn system will. Final stand is last stand with added Bullshit, and martyrdom is well, martyrdom. Unless you can come up with deathstreaks that are like copycat, where they don't give anyone an advantage, just better comprehension of the game, don't include any of them besides copycat.
I don't know if you guys have already mentioned this or not, but just remove it. Nobody accept deluded prepubescent kiddies (and even most of them don't like it) actually think commando is a warm welcome to the game. Its game ruining, its frustrating, its downright unfair. Just remove it, its not hard.
Trash all your ideas for deathperks. Their just plain annoying. Nobody likes getting their last stand kill stolen, nobody likes having to put in an extra clip into something with last stand. No one likes running out of ammo, the last bullet putting a guy into last stand. It randomizes the game, and it gives players an unfair advantage.
Capping objectives in Last Stand isn't fair either. fighting multiple opponents, and one of them having last stand, is a death you can do nothing about. Seriously, just get rid of last stand, get rid of deathperks all together.
I realize this isn't a very popular idea, but I think its important for the integrity of the game that both juggernaut and Stopping power get removed, completely.
Stopping power especially, but both dominate(d) the second perk slot. It gives the game a lot less diversity in terms of what you can use, and it makes 1v1 gunfights too easy.
I know a lot of people hated juggernaut, and I'm sure it won't return. So please, don't bring stopping power back either. Its a popular perk, but its so overused. All MW2 is is stopping power, and danger close. All COD4 was is stopping power, and juggernaut. All W@W was was juggernaut and stopping power.
Again, a great addition to the game, but they do need changes.
Camping for killstreaks
The issue of camping for killstreaks really only started with MW2. The killstreaks being relatively difficult to get (in terms of aggressive play) for most players, and the fact that certain killstreaks can literally play the game for you, promote excessive hyper defensive (AKA boring camping) gameplay from a large portion of the people that play this game.
Your standard player recognizes the potential killstreaks have to multiply his score by ten fold, that sitting in a corner waiting for 5 minutes to get 5 kills is worth the payoff. Not only that, but once the player achieves the killstreak reward, he camps more, because of killstreaks building up.
I suggest killstreak rewards be overhauled. Another forum member suggested going back to 3-5-7 killstreak rewards, and from there you would just customize what type of KS reward went where.
Another thing I feel must happen is that killstreak rewards need to be small rewards. Not game changers. No AC-130s or chopper gunners or nukes. UAV, counter UAV, even a regular airstrike would be fine. This way, they A) force players to play the game themselves, and B) don't get out of hand or frustrating.
Again, just suggestions. But I feel the overall killstreak rewards need a big overhaul in one way or another to stop promoting the boring campy playstyle that so many players have taken up to in Modern Warfare 2.
Care packages/Emergency Airdrops
Need to go. Period.
If you can't get a 7 kill streak, you do not deserve a 7 killstreak reward. If you can't get an AC-130, you do not deserve an AC-130. Its that simple. Players do not need their asses wiped for them. This game is most likely going to be rated M for mature. If your not mature enough to handle the fact that you can't get an AC-130 on your own, you don't deserve to be playing the game. Its random, it bases the game off of luck, and it ruins many gamemodes.
I have games of TDM where my team is winning 7000-6000. The other team gets a care package with a chopper gunner, and they win, all because they got lucky. In SND, someone who gets an ac-130 in a care package just won an entire round for his team, without actually getting 11 kills in a row. Care packages need to go flat out.
Emergency airdrops aren't as bad, but again, they randomize the game. If you can't get a killstreak reward, you don't deserve that killstreak reward. Plane and simple. Not only that, but a measly 8 killstreak could turn into a 40 killstreak with the E-drop. I've seen people have airdrops that have been sent by god himself. Pavelow, harrier, harrier, ac-130. For an 8 killstreak. Thats far beyond fair.
The only people that like care packages and E-drops are the ones that can't play the game, so they need their asses wiped for them. Just remove them. Its easy.
Again, anything like this, needs to go. These are extremely random. You may as well have a killstreak reward where you select someone on the enemy team to drop dead. That's literally what the predator missile is. A free kill, that the enemy can do nothing about.
Yes, I'm aware that there is cold blooded, and I'm aware you can hang out indoors. But still, I shouldn't be forced to use a perk and hang around indoors just to avoid a predator missile.
In fact, often times indoors isn't even the answer, since the predator missile can go through windows and walls through the ceiling.
Anything similar to the predator missile needs to not exist, flat out. Its random, and like I said, its quite literally another word for "Select an enemy to drop dead".
KS reward kills
This is more or less a chance I want to see with the system itself. Kills that a killstreak reward get shouldn't count toward your killstreak. So, if I get a harrier, and that gets me 4 kills, I shouldn't now have a chopper gunner. Kills that a KS get should just be kills. They shouldn't count towards any streak whatsoever.
All the current system in MW2 does is reward campers, and overly reward decent killstreaks. A 7 killstreak can turn into a nuke. I have at times, only gotten 7 kills with my gun, and just sat in a corner for the rest of the game, and I got a nuke. Thats not the way a game should be played.
It promotes excessive defensive play, and overly rewards decent killstreaks. An 11 killstreak is suppose to be difficult, yet why are chopper gunners and ac-130s so common?
One of the biggest selling points for a video game is how well a player can customize their experience, options wise as well.
This is something I feel every console game should have. Especially for Call of Duty though, where you have a lot of actions, and depending on someone's play style, they may preffere one over the other.
For example, I want to be able to jump while simultaneously looking around. I also want to be able to knife while looking around. Given the current control options, I can't do that. Have the preset loadouts, but give us the option to expand upon that.
This is something MW2 introduced a little bit, but I feel like its a really cool idea if its taken further.
Simply put, I would like to be able to customize my HUD. Where my ammo counter is, where my mini map is, where my inventory is. I'm no programmer, so I'm not aware of how difficult this would be to implement, but I would very much like too see more customization thrown our way.
Call of Duty is big on sound. I remember you guys included this in W@W, but I don't exactly remember to what degree, and what the specifications were.
But yes, I want to be able to fully customize how I hear the game. I want to be able to mute the music in SND, make footsteps louder, make announcer calls louder, make teammates voices softer. You get the idea.
Also, audio adjustments for the system your using (like headset or surround sound) would be nice as well.
Aside from the brightness, I think more visual options would be good as well.
So, for example, customization over how many particles show up on my screen (whether or not I can see those little bubblegum wrappers flying around in the air).
I know I'm being vague, but I've always felt visual options like this for consoles would be a great addition.
These are more or less things I would personally like to see because I think its cool.
Bolt Action Rifles
I'm a tad confused as if this is taking place in Vietnam, or just secret missions during the cold war. (if someone could clarify, that would be great). But I really want bolt action rifles.
I'm not just talking sniper rifles, I'm talking Kar 98k rifles. Those things were fun as hell to use. Whether it be an option to not have a scope on your sniper rifle (like an m40 w/out a scope=bolt action fun).
Again, I know this is a bit of a stretch. But having real bolt action rifles would just be badass, you know!
Accurate in game stats
Call of duty games always lie about how their weapons perform. The in game stats are almost always false. I would really like if they weren't.
In fact, I think everyone would like this. It would help bad players (because they would know more, and knowledge is power), and it would help good players, because we wouldn't have to go and check out Den kirson for stats. It would also help people in general be more educated.
The killcams in this game have a tendency to lie. an accurate killcam would be appreciated.
I would like for there to be a feature within the game that saves all the kills you get, so the kill-cams your enemies see, are stored as video files, that you can upload and edit. I know montage makers would love this, and it would be very cool to be able to see you get a cool kill and share it with the world, even though you don't have a capture card.
Again, Treyarch, thank you for reading. I really hope you at least take what I've said into account. It feels good to write up something and know its actually read by intelligent people that care about their consumers.
In section "Quality, not Quantity", in paragraph 3, sentence two, you used the wrong form of "it's" Anyways, I do not know if I posted on this before, but a lot of this is good stuff, and Trey Arch should take the time to read all of it. It reflects a lot of the communty's opinions.
Okay, will be sure to change that.
Though next time, can you not quote the entire post. Tad too long for that.
Sane Hedrone wrote:
Edit - if you want to respond to something within the post, thats fine, I'm more than happy to read those. But please don't quote the entire OP. Its way too long
...But I noticed how you did not mention zombies? Is it because you don't like Zombies, don't care, or just forgot?...