Ya because on a video game people have to follow these list of made up rules. You have to play like this, or you have to play like that. Back when I played Halo 2 people rarely gave 2 flying s****s about how you played as long as you were not hacking or lag switching. This gaming community keeps growing larger and larger and opinions keep getting more and more irrational.
I just cannot wait until Destiny or Titanfall comes out just so I can hear some of the COD crybabies moan about something being unrealistic in a game that is not supposed to be realistic.
These "irrational opinions," as you call them, are rooted in Call of Duty's "modern" history though. Weapon balancing was rooted in realistic applications of various weapons. SGs/SMGs dominate close range and so on. The community has actively attempted to redefine those rules however. Often opting instead to take seemingly unrealistic approaches to engagement and label them as "skilled" or "advanced" tactics. What you're seeing when people argue against QS and end up over-nerfing SRs through banter is an attempt to return to our roots. Call of Duty 4 didn't see much QS. It's true that QS has existed, or the ability to QS at least, since non-modern titles, but it wasn't as prominent and things made a bit more sense back then. It's hardly irrational to want a structured MP and the community has been calling for a "return to roots" for quite some time.
On that note, our game is much differently structured than Halo 2. I too played Halo 2, but that entire meta was based around controlling and acquiring power weapons. Those were the Sniper Rifles, Rocket Launchers and Plasma Swords for those that don't know. People didn't complain because you couldn't start the match and begin drag-scoping everyone unless you were in the SR playlist. With custom loadouts you need a strict meta and rule set for engagement as it only makes sense.
Just figured I'd chime in since we're reaching a point where people can't take other's opinions without overreacting. Yes, I find your opinion of 350X's opinion an overreaction.
Seriously foxhound your use of the English language gets a lot of respect from myself and hopefully others, head mod or not you play cod and have done for years. Not sure if I'm alone here but I'd like your take on possible improvements to this game from a personal perspective as you're pretty solid at backing up your arguments from what I've read from you over the last couple of years.
Playlists seem to have changed the cod dynamic, HQ for example IMO was a great team game that used to be extremely popular and has been phased out, did you play it, do you miss it?
The maps in ghosts IMO are fine, from small to big, keeping players of all gun types happy, shotties/smg's all the way to snipers, agree/disagree?
The new CaC/squad member setup seems a bit complex for newcomers and more frequent players and detracts from the put in the time get the chase/reward to keep it interesting setup, still undecided myself and since I just can't quit cod I'll just live with it but what's your take on it?
TTK core is now close to HC, forget about connections and this is IMO a good change which I remember someone suggesting on the MW3 forum, tactics brought to the playing field instead of headless chickens. Not quite sure about the implementation of Heavy duty and think extra Core/HC playlists would have been better accepted by the community at whole. Did you like adapting to ghosts and did you think Heavy duty was in your opinion needed?
Streaks assault or support while not as exciting as previous cods seem well thought out and balanced except for the specialist/lonewolf , don't get me wrong it's different but at the same time that's what FFA is for, well in core anyway, do you see a need for specialist?
Thanks for reading boss, if you do take time out to answer feel free to include any personal suggestions you might have as even though they might not be implemented in this game, someone who can bring an opinion across that's well thought out like yourself IMO will at least be given the time of day.
Thanks for the praise! I really appreciate it!
I started typing up a reply to this, but I harbor some pretty unpopular opinions. Unpopular to the point that I feel if shared would end up putting this thread on tilt. I want to respect the developers and keep the discussion regarding their changes and fixes only, so I'll have to decline on commenting. I will say that I am thoroughly enjoying Ghosts, but would definitely make a few changes to it and Call of Duty. If you still want to talk shop, then feel free to add me on Xbox Live or shoot me a personal/direct message.
Xbox Live: II F0XH0UND II
Site Profile: Foxhound-Pro
You're a pretty cool guy Foxhound. All of the replies I have seen you post are mature and have integrity. You have my respect.
Well hes an employee and a moderator, of course hes going to post mature things lol.
In which case sniper rifles would be a OHK, regardless whether they are using a suppressor or not, to anywhere on the body. Oh and LMGs would be much more powerful than they are. A lot more.
As an avid LSAT user , ill take more of a punch
Looking at the Denkirson stats, it would seem that in order to ensure they maintain a quicker ADS speed than a QSer, AR/MR/LMG users are forced to run quickdraw. 'Must-have' perks are a bad idea in my humble opinion. Just some food for thought.
Just for everyones benefit, heres the Denkirson stats https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AhNxXL3z8i1GdHptLTZXWDNMbFg2ay0yUVV6emFFcEE&usp=sharing... Certainly an interesting read.
That's interesting, thank you for linking those stats. One thing I kind of pointed out was that the only thing that snipers have in their favour is speed. Reg gunners have pre-fire/hip fire, spray, strafe and silencers. So if snipers are given speed but they dont have all those other things what's the big deal? Bear in mind most people who run around and try to 'quickscope' aggressively aren't quick enough to really make use of that speed anyway.
I think what might be more relevant to the whole issue of whether snipers need a nerf or not is stats on how many 1 on 1 gunfights snipers are winning/losing against other classes of weapon. I would bet money than on average snipers lose the overwhelming majority of the time. I'm not sure, but stats like that might be difficult to collect but if the devs at IW can look at stats like that then they should really base their decisions on the outcomes of gunfights instead of raw stats like ADS speed etc. Just a thought.
Ya know I totally suck at sniping, and an overall average player at best, but just to try it out, I made a sniper class and went something like 15-6 my first try at it in this game, which should tell anyone who is NON biased, and uses their brain, that sniping is too easy in this game. A wall of text is fine and dandy, but all anyone really needs is common sense.. The patch did nothing, I still see people popping their sniper rifles up faster than I can get up an SMG, and I still see almost no flinch in the sniper when hitting them with bullets as they aim down their scopes....