I never played BF, so you mean other gun types other than snipers are affected?
everything, every gun has a distance to movement code making aiming and killing from distances well ( I say hard as a COD player ) but its more "ballistic real"
You pose a great question, lzjar.
The thing is, BF offers CQC maps, too. There is a tendency to compare whatever COD to BF Conquest. Bullet drop is a factor in BF CQC modes, as well, but I don't think it is a game-changing factor. IMO, BF TDM/SQTDM relies heavily upon player vs. player, not weapons. The removal of perks, streak rewards, and active/passive vehicles brings a genuine gun vs. gun perspective to the game.
Yeah, you gotta do a better job of factoring range and spread, but you also have less to worry about in other areas.
Is the COD community too simple-minded to handle the concept of bullet drop? I think so. The evidence lies in the lag issue. There's always some reason COD players miss their target ... except their own bad aim. You could switch to dedicated servers and add bullet drop to COD and then you'd have people screaming for a return to hit-scan. Guarantee it.
But, hey, they wouldn't be crying about lag!
Frankly, I would very much welcome the BF projectile system in COD. I think that would take the game to a whole new level. The problem is that I'm not sure I'd see a particular difference between BF and COD. Why not just buy BF at that point and get everything except perks and streak rewards?
Dang you lzjar. The more I think about it, the more I have to admit ... BF is a harder game to play than COD.
True Dat... much "harder" game (well to put up stellar numbers***)
When I started to play BF I could not figure out why I would aim at someone's head and miss entirely. I was playing with a friend, and he literally said: "This isn't COD, you have to account for distance"
The more I play BF, the more I see the COD mechanics as being a joke. Well that is not fair... Let's not compare games that way. Let's compare them this way, and appreciate they are NOT the same.
COD: Raise a sniper quickly, be 100% dead on target*, shoot no matter how far away they are = hit, and likely a kill
BF: Raise a sniper (much slower), be 100% off target pending distance*, gauge distance (and trajectory when they are not at the distance preset), shoot: If target does not move and you shot right = hit**, if target moves at any point = miss.
ponts to consider:
* BO had something like this pre-patch. When you raised a sniper (and remember slight of hand did nothing for snipers), the cross-hairs would not be at the center of the screen. This meant you have to take the time to aim (no quickscoping possible). But COD fans cried, and it was patched (quickscoping back)
** No sniper in BF kills with one shot unless it is a head shot, period. No Stopping power, not damage multipliers. Head shot no death.
*** No kill streaks doing the killing for you. You can jump in a tank, but it is not AI while you run around getting more kills
Two different games. Adding bullet trajectory, real damage-by-distance reduction, no OHK (unless headshot) would kill COD as we know it.
Yea, it would probably turn away their current "targeted" consumers who don't want to think more than aim and shoot.
At close range many bf4 bolt action snipers kill in one shot. Most of them can 1hk body shot up to around 15 metres.
yep, which is what I meat by damage-by-distance. I did not include that corner case, because most of the time, when you run into a sniper in CQC, you will only die if:
- you lag
- the sniper gets a lucky shot (there is no true quickscoping)
- you were so close that you got no scoped
- you freeze and are using a low damage gun
Aside from then, most of the time one can survive a sniper shot unless already hurt. On that point, in BF, if you damage someone to near death and someone else gets the kill shot, you both get awarded a kill (there are no killstreaks) and the points you get = the amount of damage inflicted
Its a curious idea,
I wouldn't say mimic BF but atleast add some, IDK im talking silliness but I think the consensus is that the community that plays this game is not really ready for the game to become more difficult.
No doubt about it. We're still on a "balance" trajectory where every new game attempts to rectify something that was deemed out of balance in the previous game. That's one thing I have to hand to Dice - "This is what we deem as balance. Accept it or move on." I understand they "tweak" damage settings or whatever (I'm actually assuming that. I've never read their update threads. Folks here have claimed they do it and I take them for their word).
No way the COD community could accept the way BF works. No way.
But, that said, I have to give credit where credit is due. There always has been something that makes COD a funner game to play. Is it the simplicity? I don't think we can write off COD as a simpleton game. I think the CAC system actually does complicate things - to a degree. When you weight the perks, though, it does become rather simpleton in nature. I don't have to worry about DC, though many apparently do, because players have to sacrifice quite a bit to use it.
That's the problem with the COD community. Not so much the "easy" aspects of the game, but rather that players focus too much upon what advantages their opponents have instead of the disadvantages their opponents have.
For COD, no, the maps are just too small. Works for Battlefield because the maps are large. The snipers are the most obvious to notice the ballistic bullet drop.