637 replies to this topic

[Chyros]

 Wizard, on 25 May 2011, 15:15, said:

 Chyros, on 25 May 2011, 14:06, said:

 Camille, on 25 May 2011, 14:48, said:

this newest development is simply a truckload of fuck. why the hell don't people boycott this shit? didn't a goof number of PC gamers boycott MW2 for it's lack of dedis?

Yes they did, but that's not much use since the PC community is only a small fraction of the (MW2) player base (last time I checked about 7%). You'd need the xbox and PS guys to participate.

Which also means getting a lot of 13 year olds to participate (not console specific btw), which ain't gonna happen.

Exactly, not least because it's mummy and daddy's money they're spending and not their own.

Still, I wanna see what exactly the premium content is. Though I fear the worst, if it's something like hats I'm not too bothered by it .

[Wizard]

Guessing, but unique skins, extra maps, additional prestige levels.

Anything would make the foundation imba.

Expect BO-style COD points though

[Chyros]

 Wizard, on 25 May 2011, 16:18, said:

Guessing, but unique skins, extra maps, additional prestige levels.

Anything would make the foundation imba.

Well, if it were anything like that, I could live with it. Lame, but bearable. If they made a REALLY REALLY REALLY nice skin I might buy it but otherwise I can live without content like that.

Quote

Expect BO-style COD points though

Hmmm, to be honest, I'm not so sure of that. CoD points really take the fun out of the game and I think IW know that. Besides, it's not that much like IW to copy Treyarch.

[Alias]

You're forgetting this isn't an exclusively made by IW.

[Wizard]

 Chyros, on 25 May 2011, 15:35, said:

Quote

Expect BO-style COD points though

Hmmm, to be honest, I'm not so sure of that. CoD points really take the fun out of the game and I think IW know that. Besides, it's not that much like IW to copy Treyarch.

If you think about it, it fits perfectly fine. Premium content, now that can't be WoW p2p system otherwise everyone would need it, but in order to get the skins, the maps etc you have to purchase CoD points, likely a premium edition would come with some to get people interested as well tbh, the rest comes off your Daddies' credit card.

IW might not like copying Treyarch, but lest us not forget that most of the driving minds in IW that made MW and MW2 have been kicked to the curb now. Who is not to say that new monkeys haven't been installed to do the bidding of their money grabbing overlords?

Edit: I do, however, realise that this is speculative at it's best.

Edited by Wizard, 25 May 2011 - 14:43.

[Chyros]

 Alias, on 25 May 2011, 16:37, said:

You're forgetting this isn't an exclusively made by IW.

 Wizard, on 25 May 2011, 16:42, said:

If you think about it, it fits perfectly fine. Premium content, now that can't be WoW p2p system otherwise everyone would need it, but in order to get the skins, the maps etc you have to purchase CoD points, likely a premium edition would come with some to get people interested as well tbh, the rest comes off your Daddies' credit card.

IW might not like copying Treyarch, but lest us not forget that most of the driving minds in IW that made MW and MW2 have been kicked to the curb now. Who is not to say that new monkeys haven't been installed to do the bidding of their money grabbing overlords?

Edit: I do, however, realise that this is speculative at it's best.

Yes, you both raise good points there. Well, I guess we'll just have to wait to find out what it is they have in store for us. I won't do a pay-to-play thing, that will set me back too much in this time of my dire economic need, but if it's single-buy stuff that's just cosmetic then I can live with it. Playing the devil's advocate, I guess premium content does have the advantage of that if it's not pretty good no-one will bother with it.

[Alias]

 Chyros, on 26 May 2011, 1:13, said:

Yes, you both raise good points there. Well, I guess we'll just have to wait to find out what it is they have in store for us. I won't do a pay-to-play thing, that will set me back too much in this time of my dire economic need, but if it's single-buy stuff that's just cosmetic then I can live with it. Playing the devil's advocate, I guess premium content does have the advantage of that if it's not pretty good no-one will bother with it.

Unfortunately I don't think that's the case. A lot of people will buy anything that has Call of Duty plastered on it, regardless of how "good" it is. Black Ops showed that, not to mention all the silly DLC for it that still sells like hotcakes even if it is something the developer created in a week.

I'm sorry Chyros, but Call of Duty is a cash cow and Activision knows it. They are only doing this shit because people are stupid enough to pay for it.

[Chyros]

 Alias, on 25 May 2011, 17:16, said:

 Chyros, on 26 May 2011, 1:13, said:

Yes, you both raise good points there. Well, I guess we'll just have to wait to find out what it is they have in store for us. I won't do a pay-to-play thing, that will set me back too much in this time of my dire economic need, but if it's single-buy stuff that's just cosmetic then I can live with it. Playing the devil's advocate, I guess premium content does have the advantage of that if it's not pretty good no-one will bother with it.

Unfortunately I don't think that's the case. A lot of people will buy anything that has Call of Duty plastered on it, regardless of how "good" it is. Black Ops showed that, not to mention all the silly DLC for it that still sells like hotcakes even if it is something the developer created in a week.

I'm sorry Chyros, but Call of Duty is a cash cow and Activision knows it. They are only doing this shit because people are stupid enough to pay for it.

Well, that was just the classic argument proponents of DLC give. Like I said, I heavily oppose DLC and stuff like it, personally.

[CJ]

 Wizard, on 25 May 2011, 15:18, said:

Guessing, but unique skins, extra maps, additional prestige levels.

Anything would make the foundation imba.

Let's just hope for the sake of those who're gonna still but the game that it only affects those points, imagine if Activision were to simply charge people if they want to have some of the highest level weapons and/or perks. As long as it's only affecting the visual part it's not much of a deal, but if it were to affect gameplay, that'd be problematic...

[General]

What I want to see made better is; level system, seriously you need to play hundreds of hours to get P10 LV70 and it has nothing as a reward then a friggin new icon

[Wanderer]

You do get more custom class -slots when you prestige

[General]

 Wanderer, on 25 May 2011, 19:03, said:

You do get more custom class -slots when you prestige

I know and thats not something big since 5 is enough already,( I personally make: Assault, Sniper, Commando, Riot and Heavy specialization ) they must add something more than custom class slot since you give tens of hours ( depends on how good you play and how much points you get in a match ) to gain another Prestige Level.

[Chyros]

 Gabriel Angelos, on 25 May 2011, 20:07, said:

 Wanderer, on 25 May 2011, 19:03, said:

You do get more custom class -slots when you prestige

I know and thats not something big since 5 is enough already,( I personally make: Assault, Sniper, Commando, Riot and Heavy specialization ) they must add something more than custom class slot since you give tens of hours ( depends on how good you play and how much points you get in a match ) to gain another Prestige Level.

I disagree on two things. First, with some imagination five or even ten classes is NOT much. I can name about twenty diverse classes that all have at least a decent potential, and I'd really like to be able to use all of them. EDIT actually it's closer to 30.

Second, the point of prestiging is IMO also to reset your progress. Which is in one way infuriating, but also one of the things that keep the game fresh for a longer time.

Edited by Chyros, 25 May 2011 - 18:36.

[CJ]

 Gabriel Angelos, on 25 May 2011, 19:07, said:

 Wanderer, on 25 May 2011, 19:03, said:

You do get more custom class -slots when you prestige

I know and thats not something big since 5 is enough already,( I personally make: Assault, Sniper, Commando, Riot and Heavy specialization ) they must add something more than custom class slot since you give tens of hours ( depends on how good you play and how much points you get in a match ) to gain another Prestige Level.

I guess this depends of the person, I have a friend who's happy with the 5 default classes in MW2, but personally, I'd love to have more classes slots, cause I like to try different tactics in a single match. It'd be far better if they allowed you to use the Create A Class screen in the middle of a game, like in CoD 4's "Mod Warfare" mod...

[Chyros]

Sniffing through Bowling's twatter in search of something I read on the news:

-@DrakesUncharted Nothing about that sentence implies that. I've been clear that Pay to Play does not and will not exist.
-@JamboPugh Yes sir. We've got a ton of new tools of warfare at your disposal plus new features such as dual-scope abilities. (the ability to switch on the fly between close-range and long-range optics -red.)
-(on the question if there will be noob tube problems)@its_Samir I personally don't think so. We are very aware of the balance feedback and issues with launchers in MW2 and have been addressing. (implying that they are at least trying -red.)
-@Evil_Paladin We don't have lead platforms, we develop each version alongside each other. Xbox 360 is running at same as PS3. (see what he did there with the PC? -red.)
-@SSClan PC is included in that, don't be so quick to assume PC isn't included. It's the one platform that receives unique optimizations. (steam? -red.)

[Pav:3d]

Im guessing that any weapon that cant equip dual optics will be horrendously underpowered comparatively. I hope COD points dont return, it took away any incentive to level up besides the shiny icons.

[Chyros]

 Pav:3d, on 27 May 2011, 10:46, said:

Im guessing that any weapon that cant equip dual optics will be horrendously underpowered comparatively.

How so? Optics were always utterly useless in CoD and a waste of an attachment. Especially the long-range optics since they've so far always featured increased recoil. Really, I'm not worried about this at all myself.

I mean seriously, who uses red dots and holos for anything but challenges anyway?

 Pav:3d, on 27 May 2011, 10:46, said:

Im guessing that any weapon that cant equip dual optics will be horrendously underpowered comparatively.

How so? Optics were always utterly useless in CoD and a waste of an attachment. Especially the long-range optics since they've so far always featured increased recoil. Really, I'm not worried about this at all myself.

I mean seriously, who uses red dots and holos for anything but challenges anyway?

[Camille]

uhm, i use optics... when not having unlocked FMJ they are the best thing for me to have.

[Wanderer]

Depending on the gun I use red dot or holosight, If I find the ironsights to be hard to use or annoying. But yeahh, It's either the tube or FMJ that has the most use (or grip if talking about LMG's, or thermal if talking about snipers )

[Destiny]

 Chyros, on 27 May 2011, 17:03, said:

I mean seriously, who uses red dots and holos for anything but challenges anyway?

Some guns have downright shitty as fuck ironsights.


Not my FAMAS FELIN though

[Chyros]

I'm surprised at so much popularity of optics, really. They don't statistically alter the weapons (except in one or two bugged cases) and apart from only four or so cases iron sights in CoD are bordering noobishly easy to use IMO .

Really if there's one thing that doesn't scare me of being overpowered it's dual optics. Give me a functional attachment any day.

[Wanderer]

It's just a matter of personal preferance. Some ppl like the iron sights. some don't. The dual optics will just mean that you don't have any drawbacks on range and have more options. No matter what your choice is, it's not wrong. It's just what you like to use. Some guns I prefer with iron sights even for long range, others I like having a red dot on. I've even had some fun with the ACOG, even though it's fucked up.

I like that they are adding variety to the attachments, I like that they are having new ideas. I hope that they can have enough diverse weapons, attachments and equipments in the game to keep it interesting and to make them balanced enough that it won't be the same as with MW2 (noobtube, akimbo-G18's, akimbo 1887)

Edited by Wanderer, 27 May 2011 - 11:08.

[Pav:3d]

 Chyros, on 27 May 2011, 10:03, said:

 Pav:3d, on 27 May 2011, 10:46, said:

Im guessing that any weapon that cant equip dual optics will be horrendously underpowered comparatively.

How so? Optics were always utterly useless in CoD and a waste of an attachment. Especially the long-range optics since they've so far always featured increased recoil. Really, I'm not worried about this at all myself.

I mean seriously, who uses red dots and holos for anything but challenges anyway?

As said, some guns have stupid ironsights that end up blocking half the screen. The long range + short range optics will mean people will just spam the crap out of the AR's (which im almost certain they will feature exclusively on), there will be no tactics to whether or not you equip your long range AR set-up or your short range one, you just switch between both on the fly, plus you could switch to thermal and back if you're having trouble scouting for people. That said if they balance it then there'll be no problem But somehow I doubt it.

[Chyros]

 Pav:3d, on 27 May 2011, 15:08, said:

 Chyros, on 27 May 2011, 10:03, said:

 Pav:3d, on 27 May 2011, 10:46, said:

Im guessing that any weapon that cant equip dual optics will be horrendously underpowered comparatively.

How so? Optics were always utterly useless in CoD and a waste of an attachment. Especially the long-range optics since they've so far always featured increased recoil. Really, I'm not worried about this at all myself.

I mean seriously, who uses red dots and holos for anything but challenges anyway?

As said, some guns have stupid ironsights that end up blocking half the screen. The long range + short range optics will mean people will just spam the crap out of the AR's (which im almost certain they will feature exclusively on)

If ARs will be overpowered (quite probable they will be, I'm looking at you, 40-30 damage class and lack of recoil), it will almost certainly not be because of optics. First of all, you can see the enemy crystal clear even at normal magnification, second, optics don't fight an AR's recoil; the one and only actual obstacle between an AR and a long-range kill.

To illustrate what I mean, let me take the ACR from MW2 which is a perfect example. The ACR has no recoil or idling, which allows you to put all bullets into exactly the same spot in fully automatic mode. Since it has outstanding, very precise and very easy-to-use iron sights, you can just aim at the opponent's head and put bullets through it, killing them in two or three shots from any distance (killtime 0,16 seconds). Even with just the bare iron sights it's very easy to kill someone over maximum range because the player's eyesight in game is 100% perfect and distance does not blur one's vision, so every pixel of head that sticks out from behind cover sticks out like a sore thumb. All you need to do is point and shoot which automatically leads to a kill. Having a long-range scope on your weapon doesn't change ANYTHING about all this for the better (though it does hamper you at close range where you can't see fuck all).

On the other hand, if you had used an AK-47 for example, which features both idling (well usually) and recoil, you could very easily land a first shot into someone, but it would not be as easy to make a headshot out of it at very long range, and you'd have to fight recoil and idling to try and hit them with the follow-up shots, giving the opponent ample time to respond and kill you if you're shooting anything less than very well. If you stuck on a long-range scope, you would again STILL encounter the same problems and you wouldn't have an easier time in any way at all.

So IMO optics that only alter sights and/or magnification are literally 100% irrelevant in terms of real gameplay. Something like thermal vision is, though, because this doesn't show the same image with and without zooming in.

Edited by Chyros, 27 May 2011 - 13:36.

[Destiny]

Maybe they should do damage based on the caliber of the guns? So all those 5.56 will have near the same damage, and 7.62 will have a lot more but blabblah and .50BMG OHKOs everyone anywhere