156 replies to this topic

[Chyros]

 Shirou, on 7 Oct 2010, 18:06, said:

 Chyros, on 7 Oct 2010, 11:53, said:

 Shirou, on 7 Oct 2010, 11:13, said:

stating that aiming in BC2 or MoH is just like hipspraying and 100 percent luck is b.u.l.l.s.h.i.t.

It fires randomly in a cone, so technically it can always decide to make you miss every single shot you ever fired, even if they were aimed true. I'd call that 100% luck.

No. While BC2 is basing the direction of every shot on random generator, this is (about 100% likely) a pseudo-random generator. A true random generator would be too much effort for Dice to include and the computations have to be made extremely fast, so it needs to be very simple. A simple pseudo-random generator even gives better results for players while still keeping up the veil that the game realistically generates bullet trajectories.

False generators won't have you miss every shot of your magazine on that far away enemy. So while technically you are right, I practically think its a bit more subtle. This is of course pure speculation, but I find it highly unlikely BC2 uses a true random generator. /nitpicking.

_{splitting the hair so you don't have to}

No matter the source of the randomness or the logarithm responsible for it, it's still out of your hands where the bullets actually hit, and it is therefore not based on skill but on luck. Saying it is based on skill is like saying winning the lottery is based on skill "because you were so skilled to buy that particular lottery ticket".

Edited by Chyros, 07 October 2010 - 16:51.

[Kalo]

 Chyros, on 7 Oct 2010, 8:39, said:

 Kalo, on 7 Oct 2010, 9:32, said:

Because even when you are firing your deviation is trying to reset.

It's inaccurate by x degrees by default, and when you are firing, it's still x degrees inaccurate. There is nothing to reset.

This whole conception is why you don't play the game so well, Chyros. Spraying like a maniac in full auto is something reserved for CQB and from the sounds of it? You're spraying at ranges of like sixty to one hundred meters. Your comic also very wrong, it sounds like you've just got this whole idea in your head as an excuse to not play the game. Really though, this whole random cone you speak of is pretty much something I've never noticed and sounds very much like an excuse .

Edited by Kalo, 07 October 2010 - 16:58.

[Chyros]

 Kalo, on 7 Oct 2010, 18:55, said:

 Chyros, on 7 Oct 2010, 8:39, said:

 Kalo, on 7 Oct 2010, 9:32, said:

Because even when you are firing your deviation is trying to reset.

It's inaccurate by x degrees by default, and when you are firing, it's still x degrees inaccurate. There is nothing to reset.

This whole conception is why you don't play the game so well, Chyros. Spraying like a maniac in full auto is something reserved for CQB and from the sounds of it? You're spraying at ranges of like sixty to one hundred meters. Your comic also very wrong, it sounds like you've just got this whole idea in your head as an excuse to not play the game. Really though, this whole random cone you speak of is pretty much something I've never noticed and sounds very much like an excuse .

I'm not making it up though. In MoH, the cone when firing is the same as when not firing. Only if you move, the cone actually expands (very slowly). If you've never noticed the cone in BC2 games that just, IMO, goes to show how badly the system works, since it's obviously not possible to gauge your shots well let alone influence them if someone as experienced as you can't even.

As for a excuse not to play the game - that's not true at all. I've actually managed to convince myself of buying BC2 in a wave of blind optimism, which I still regret to this day and I enjoy the company of my online friends here at FS as anyone will testify. I bought BC2 at least partially because everyone here was so hyped and wanted to get the game. However, I found the game terrible and everyone quickly abandoned it, many for MW2. The reason I don't like BC2 is quite simply that it's too slow-paced for me and that every concept of randomness and luck utterly revolts me. MoH combines the concepts of what I hated most about BC2 and MW2 in a terrible hybrid of game mechanics - why would I ever get it?

Edited by Chyros, 07 October 2010 - 17:06.

[Kalo]

 Chyros, on 7 Oct 2010, 17:04, said:

 Kalo, on 7 Oct 2010, 18:55, said:

 Chyros, on 7 Oct 2010, 8:39, said:

 Kalo, on 7 Oct 2010, 9:32, said:

Because even when you are firing your deviation is trying to reset.

It's inaccurate by x degrees by default, and when you are firing, it's still x degrees inaccurate. There is nothing to reset.

This whole conception is why you don't play the game so well, Chyros. Spraying like a maniac in full auto is something reserved for CQB and from the sounds of it? You're spraying at ranges of like sixty to one hundred meters. Your comic also very wrong, it sounds like you've just got this whole idea in your head as an excuse to not play the game. Really though, this whole random cone you speak of is pretty much something I've never noticed and sounds very much like an excuse .

I'm not making it up though. In MoH, the cone when firing is the same as when not firing. Only if you move, the cone actually expands (very slowly). If you've never noticed the cone in BC2 games that just, IMO, goes to show how badly the system works, since it's obviously not possible to gauge your shots well let alone influence them if someone as experienced as you can't even.

As for a excuse not to play the game - that's not true at all. I've actually managed to convince myself of buying BC2 in a wave of blind optimism, which I still regret to this day and I enjoy the company of my online friends here at FS as anyone will testify. I bought BC2 at least partially because everyone here was so hyped and wanted to get the game. However, I found the game terrible and everyone quickly abandoned it, many for MW2. The reason I don't like BC2 is quite simply that it's too slow-paced for me and that every concept of randomness and luck utterly revolts me.

The cone is only noticed when I am strafing while Ironsighted, or at extreme ranges. for those that know of Atacama Desert, imagine trying to shoot from the Alpha Flag into the Russian Uncappable base. Other than that? All of my bullets go where I tell them to. This whole idea you have about it being luck makes sense in a long range battle, but other than that. No, it doesn't. And is pretty excuse-tastic.



And I am definitely not telling you to get MoH, I'm not even getting it because of how awful it is.

Edited by Kalo, 07 October 2010 - 17:12.

[SquigPie]

Chyros, why do you play MW2 anyway? It's the most insanely unbalanced multiplayer game ever! Just take the infamous One Man Army Pro-Noobtube combo, it's so bad that when they have tournaments they have to outlaw about half the different weapons and perks just to make something resembling balance, everyone uses the same damn skillset and the same damn weapon (either noobtube or UMP/raffica), the killstreaks (especially chopper/gunship) render the game frustrating and annoying due to the entire enemy team being wiped out 3 times in a row, AND DON'T EVEN GET ME STARTED ON DEDICATED SERVERS!

[Libains]

 SquigPie, on 7 Oct 2010, 18:14, said:

Chyros, why do you play MW2 anyway? It's the most insanely unbalanced multiplayer game ever! Just take the infamous One Man Army Pro-Noobtube combo, it's so bad that when they have tournaments they have to outlaw about half the different weapons and perks just to make something resembling balance, everyone uses the same damn skillset and the same damn weapon (either noobtube or UMP/raffica), the killstreaks (especially chopper/gunship) render the game frustrating and annoying due to the entire enemy team being wiped out 3 times in a row, AND DON'T EVEN GET ME STARTED ON DEDICATED SERVERS!

*Sighs*

*Prepares for Chyros to own your ass*

Back @ Original Topic, I am really not fussed by another MoH, I haven't played a good one in years and I don't get the feeling this one is going to change my mind. At all. In the least bit.

[Chyros]

 SquigPie, on 7 Oct 2010, 19:14, said:

Chyros, why do you play MW2 anyway? It's the most insanely unbalanced multiplayer game ever! Just take the infamous One Man Army Pro-Noobtube combo, it's so bad that when they have tournaments they have to outlaw about half the different weapons and perks just to make something resembling balance, everyone uses the same damn skillset and the same damn weapon (either noobtube or UMP/raffica), the killstreaks (especially chopper/gunship) render the game frustrating and annoying due to the entire enemy team being wiped out 3 times in a row

If you would've played MW2 at all, you would know that most of this isn't actually true. Granted, the balance is terrible - no argument about that at all. But-ah, you pick your noobtube or UMP + raffica class or whatever you want and I'll pown your arse to hell and back with another class - one that's not dependent on UMPs or rafficas or noobtubes, I guarantee you this. Noobtubes may be easy to use, but against an opponent who doesn't need one, you'll always lose to a class that's in the end potentially a lot more powerful. The chopper gunner is usually countered before it even reaches the map if your team have the wits the gods gave a worm (or it won't make a single kill because everyone was safely indoors at the moment). Just like people who hate thermal scopes and heartbeat sensors which are perfectly balanced and in fact almost inviable from a competitive point of view, these misconceptions stem from a bad understanding of how the game works, what mechanics it's built on and what numbers and figures apply to the situation.

Now if you say you don't like the game because it has hitscans or it's unrealistic or you don't like killstreaks at all to begin with, I mean, that's just a matter of preference; can't argue about that. But hating MW2 because the chopper gunner is overpowered when it's easily taken out before it manages to do anything or when people use a noob tube or UMP or raffica on you and you consider these weapons too overpowered to counter is not a matter of taste, that's just not understanding the game.

I know how MoH and BC2 work, I know their mechanics and their figures, and though I'm doubtlessly nowhere near the skill of any of you veteran players of the game, I do know the workings. I just don't like them. I know how to deal with tanks or hit bullets more reliably, I just don't want to have to compete with tanks in the first place and I want things that I point at to die quickly .

As for the caveat, I've never said MW2 is ideal, in fact I'd happily desert it for another shooter. No shooter atm is decent enough (to me) to be worth doing so though, so that's why I play MW2. I'd love nothing more than BO to wipe the streets with MW2, for example.

[SquigPie]

 Chyros, on 7 Oct 2010, 19:38, said:

If you would've played MW2 at all, you would know that most of this isn't actually true. Granted, the balance is terrible - no argument about that at all. But-ah, you pick your noobtube or UMP + raffica class or whatever you want and I'll pown your arse to hell and back with another class - one that's not dependent on UMPs or rafficas or noobtubes, I guarantee you this. Noobtubes may be easy to use, but against an opponent who doesn't need one, you'll always lose to a class that's in the end potentially a lot more powerful.

I tried finding the infamous video where a guy shows himself getting 150 kills in 5 mins by using Noobtube/One Man Army Pro. But I frankly couldn't, I don't suggest that it's the only thing you CAN use to win, the problem is it's the only one people use. And I honestly hate playing a game that's almost entirely composed out of grenades flying in your general direction and STILL. FUCKING. KILLING. YOU.

Quote

The chopper gunner is usually countered before it even reaches the map if your team have the wits the gods gave a worm (or it won't make a single kill because everyone was safely indoors at the moment). Just like people who hate thermal scopes and heartbeat sensors which are perfectly balanced and in fact almost inviable from a competitive point of view, these misconceptions stem from a bad understanding of how the game works, what mechanics it's built on and what numbers and figures apply to the situation.

You obviously haven't played the same MW2 I have, chopper gunners have the amazing ability to hit you as soon as you spawn, as soon as you aim your launcher at them, I can take normal helicopters. But 2-missiles-to-take-down-kill-you-as-soon-as-you-spawn choppers just pisses me off.

Quote

Now if you say you don't like the game because it has hitscans or it's unrealistic or you don't like killstreaks at all to begin with, I mean, that's just a matter of preference; can't argue about that. But hating MW2 because the chopper gunner is overpowered when it's easily taken out before it manages to do anything or when people use a noob tube or UMP or raffica on you and you consider these weapons too overpowered to counter is not a matter of taste, that's just not understanding the game.

I honestly HATE when people say this, "You can't counter stupid overpowered idiots one-shotting you with impoorly balanced weapons by using insanely complex and skill-taking strategies thus you suck and need L2P". I don't want to have 1337 skills to not die because I don't resort to the same lame combo everyone else use. It's not a matter of not understanding the game Chyros, it's a matter of balance. Cheap tactics shouln't take ludicriously complex tactics to beat. That's not fair, nor balanced. My problem with MW2 is that it rewards cheap tactics, games that do that aren't very good.

 AJ, on 7 Oct 2010, 19:18, said:

*Sighs*

*Prepares for Chyros to own your ass*

Back @ Original Topic, I am really not fussed by another MoH, I haven't played a good one in years and I don't get the feeling this one is going to change my mind. At all. In the least bit.

Edited by SquigPie, 07 October 2010 - 18:34.

[Shirou]

Highly improbable D:

On this:



What I was trying to explain is that this really never happens because, in my experience, this random generator is not random. It will point a bullet near the center if some others have gone out of it. Examples of this is seeing static wookies from a medium distance and trying to headshot them. Usually the first shot takes the cake but if it isn't its always the second or third. Never have I had a perfectly aimed burst at a static head miss.

On the other hand I usually do not engage on the longer ranged battles because I play with a very low resolution and low DPI mouse (I tried to get a gaming mouse but I got screwed over by this webshop :S) so I can't really get my aim steady enough anyway, not even taking into account the cone effect. Having said that I usually play medium range in which the cone usually envelops most of the enemy body and missing it is improbable.

Edited by Shirou, 07 October 2010 - 18:20.

[Wanderer]

Offtopic:
You can't make a true random generator as the thing needs to be build on some algorithm and there is always a pattern to it, no matter how long/difficult it is.


I don't use any of the overpowered weapons/perks and I still do good. It's just about finding the playstyle that suits you. And it works for all games.


On topic:

I've played the MoH beta and I have to say that it's nothign special. I have more fun playing MW2. There's not that much stuff to unlock and if it's only coming with 8 maps, it's not gonna be interesting for very long.

Edited by Wanderer, 07 October 2010 - 20:43.

[BeefJeRKy]

A computer is a deterministic machine therefore true randomness can never be achieved by a machine.

As to why I prefer hitscans, it's mostly a matter of taste. I find that I tend to shoot a lot while on the move and having to compensate for a hundred things at once breaks my concentration too much. It's as Chyros said. The bullets seem to hit in a cone from the start. I fire in bursts anyway; it's a habit I acquired from Battlefield 2, but the initial cone in those games felt far less random. I can't say I like the Bad Company games too much after playing them.

I wouldn't mind a projectile system if it were implemented properly. It seems as if I should try Red Orchestra but I don't see anyway for me to get it (thank you Lebanese ISPs )

I hope that Battlefield 3 goes back to more grassroots Battlefield gameplay, because the console style of BC2 didn't really lure me in as much as I thought it would.

And Modern Warfare 2 is fun even if there are some imbalances, but tbh they can be overcome.

[Chyros]

 SquigPie, on 7 Oct 2010, 19:58, said:

Quote

The chopper gunner is usually countered before it even reaches the map if your team have the wits the gods gave a worm (or it won't make a single kill because everyone was safely indoors at the moment). Just like people who hate thermal scopes and heartbeat sensors which are perfectly balanced and in fact almost inviable from a competitive point of view, these misconceptions stem from a bad understanding of how the game works, what mechanics it's built on and what numbers and figures apply to the situation.

You obviously haven't played the same MW2 I have, chopper gunners have the amazing ability to hit you as soon as you spawn, as soon as you aim your launcher at them, I can take normal helicopters. But 2-missiles-to-take-down-kill-you-as-soon-as-you-spawn choppers just pisses me off.

There's often at least one in your team who has a launcher to begin with. If you die before it hits the playing field (this usually takes 10 seconds or more, btw), you should always respawn with an AA-capable class. This will render you invisible to the chopper gunner and you'll be able to take it down easily when it does hit the field. If you didn't die while it was arriving, that means you'll be looking for some cover. In the rather rare event that you can't get to any kind of cover in 10 seconds or die, you only need to die once before you can respawn with a countering class. Countering a CG is piss easy. Many people are just too stupid, or more commonly, too lazy to do so.

Quote

Quote

Now if you say you don't like the game because it has hitscans or it's unrealistic or you don't like killstreaks at all to begin with, I mean, that's just a matter of preference; can't argue about that. But hating MW2 because the chopper gunner is overpowered when it's easily taken out before it manages to do anything or when people use a noob tube or UMP or raffica on you and you consider these weapons too overpowered to counter is not a matter of taste, that's just not understanding the game.

I honestly HATE when people say this, "You can't counter stupid overpowered idiots one-shotting you with impoorly balanced weapons by using insanely complex and skill-taking strategies thus you suck and need L2P". I don't want to have 1337 skills to not die because I don't resort to the same lame combo everyone else use. It's not a matter of not understanding the game Chyros, it's a matter of balance. Cheap tactics shouln't take ludicriously complex tactics to beat. That's not fair, nor balanced. My problem with MW2 is that it rewards cheap tactics, games that do that aren't very good.

Perhaps I should've explained clearer. It DOESN'T take unconventional tactics of any kind of defeat a noob tuber. It DOESN't take ludicrously complex tactics to defeat a noob tuber. All you need to do is not suck as badly as they do. Bullet weapons are a lot more dangerous than noob tubes will ever be. Noob tubes are very disrupting to objective-based gameplay unfortunately, and this is where they get rather nasty. However, in FFA, going OMA/DC with a noob tube will probably land you at best in the lower half of the score board. Noob tubes are cheap, very irritating, and kind of break certain gametypes, but to say they're unbalanced is just not true. Badly designed, no question. But balance is not an issue on this particular point.

 Shirou, on 7 Oct 2010, 20:18, said:

What I was trying to explain is that this really never happens because, in my experience, this random generator is not random. It will point a bullet near the center if some others have gone out of it. Examples of this is seeing static wookies from a medium distance and trying to headshot them. Usually the first shot takes the cake but if it isn't its always the second or third. Never have I had a perfectly aimed burst at a static head miss.

Like I said, it's just a matter of personal preference on my side. I cannot abide any kind of luck factor, and just want to get in and out of combat quickly. MoH will not be able to offer me what I want in this regard, just like BC2 didn't.

Edited by Chyros, 07 October 2010 - 23:14.

[Kalo]

 scope, on 7 Oct 2010, 23:00, said:

I hope that Battlefield 3 goes back to more grassroots Battlefield gameplay, because the console style of BC2 didn't really lure me in as much as I thought it would.

I too, share this opinion.

Edited by Kalo, 08 October 2010 - 04:29.

[Pav:3d]

BF3 needs to do away with DICE's whole "look we're like cod too!" attitude that ruined BC2.

Get rid of that really really overdone health re-gen system for a start.

[Wanderer]

I hope they will build the game with PC in mind, no multiplatform-crap. I'm hoping it will be good. BF1942 and BF2 are great games and there is still people playing them, which tells something about the quality.



(this is how much we care about the new MoH. Good job EA on selling the game for us )

Edited by Wanderer, 08 October 2010 - 08:01.

[TehKiller]

 Chyros, on 8 Oct 2010, 0:07, said:

Like I said, it's just a matter of personal preference on my side. I cannot abide any kind of luck factor, and just want to get in and out of combat quickly. MoH will not be able to offer me what I want in this regard, just like BC2 didn't.

But in MoH thats entirely false as the cone of fire is reduced to 0 when in ADS...technically its not luck at all

[Wizard]

 Wanderer, on 8 Oct 2010, 8:52, said:

(this is how much we care about the new MoH. Good job EA on selling the game for us )

Agreed. This is why I haven't split this topic into "Hitscan v. Projectiles". It's the only way a topic about MoH would get any interest

[Pav:3d]

 Wizard, on 8 Oct 2010, 9:57, said:

 Wanderer, on 8 Oct 2010, 8:52, said:

(this is how much we care about the new MoH. Good job EA on selling the game for us )

Agreed. This is why I haven't split this topic into "Hitscan v. Projectiles". It's the only way a topic about MoH would get any interest

Well I do post vids in it, and im sure im not the only one who has a slight interest in it. But since Chyros turns it into a "its not cod therefore it sucks" (which is the gist of your point, no matter how you put it) thread I dont bother anymore. Same with BF Vietnam, there's some footage out there, and Im curious to what people will think, but itll turn into this stupid never ending argument.

[Wanderer]

I think the discussion here tells more about the game. It's not interesting enough to keep ppl talking about it. There's nothing new that hasn't been seen before. It's not just MoH though. Seems like all current/soon coming FPS-games are just "improved" versions of older ones...

[Wizard]

 Pav:3d, on 8 Oct 2010, 11:05, said:

 Wizard, on 8 Oct 2010, 9:57, said:

 Wanderer, on 8 Oct 2010, 8:52, said:

(this is how much we care about the new MoH. Good job EA on selling the game for us )

Agreed. This is why I haven't split this topic into "Hitscan v. Projectiles". It's the only way a topic about MoH would get any interest

Well I do post vids in it, and im sure im not the only one who has a slight interest in it. But since Chyros turns it into a "its not cod therefore it sucks" (which is the gist of your point, no matter how you put it) thread I dont bother anymore. Same with BF Vietnam, there's some footage out there, and Im curious to what people will think, but itll turn into this stupid never ending argument.

Sorry Pav:3D, but that just proves your not reading what Chyros is posting. I know you can't play CoD with him, but if you did he rages far more about it there than you would ever see on this forum. It's the mechanics of the game he prefers, rather than the game. He's openly admitted to enjoying BC2, if not for as long as MW.

Please post the BF:V vids. We'll only speak our minds. If the game seems to offer nothing new, then that isn't technically our fault and you can't blame us for wanting it to

 Wanderer, on 8 Oct 2010, 11:16, said:

I think the discussion here tells more about the game. It's not interesting enough to keep ppl talking about it. There's nothing new that hasn't been seen before. It's not just MoH though. Seems like all current/soon coming FPS-games are just "improved" versions of older ones...

^ This. There is nothing about MoH that I have seen that makes me want to talk about it, beyond flaming the arse out of it. And the phrase "improved" is strectching it at best.

Edited by Wizard, 08 October 2010 - 10:40.

[TehKiller]

But BF:V is a really old game...

[Pav:3d]

 Wizard, on 8 Oct 2010, 11:39, said:

 Pav:3d, on 8 Oct 2010, 11:05, said:

 Wizard, on 8 Oct 2010, 9:57, said:

 Wanderer, on 8 Oct 2010, 8:52, said:

(this is how much we care about the new MoH. Good job EA on selling the game for us )

Agreed. This is why I haven't split this topic into "Hitscan v. Projectiles". It's the only way a topic about MoH would get any interest

Well I do post vids in it, and im sure im not the only one who has a slight interest in it. But since Chyros turns it into a "its not cod therefore it sucks" (which is the gist of your point, no matter how you put it) thread I dont bother anymore. Same with BF Vietnam, there's some footage out there, and Im curious to what people will think, but itll turn into this stupid never ending argument.

Sorry Pav:3D, but that just proves your not reading what Chyros is posting. I know you can't play CoD with him, but if you did he rages far more about it there than you would ever see on this forum. It's the mechanics of the game he prefers, rather than the game. He's openly admitted to enjoying BC2, if not for as long as MW.

Please post the BF:V vids. We'll only speak our minds. If the game seems to offer nothing new, then that isn't technically our fault and you can't blame us for wanting it to

Yes I do read Chyros's responses and yes I do know he has a strong distaste for aspects of MW2, Im well aware of that, I do visit the forum you know

Its funny that through all this projectile vs hitscan ...conversation, no-one has mentioned MoH's recent controversies, they seem to be rolling in them. DICE have changed the name of the Taliban to the "Opposing Force" in their multiplayer. Even tho its a small change its gotten a lot of gaming press.
Also gaming stores on US bases are refusing to sell the game due to its content being too close to home (IE, the war is still going on...). Were these intentional (publicity stunt?)? Can it hurt the sales (even more so?)? Etc.

Edit: Okay I should wash my eyes since there was actually a whole 2 posts on the subject.
Ill just quite poking my nose in these threads.

Edited by Pav:3d, 08 October 2010 - 14:55.

[Wizard]

 Pav:3d, on 8 Oct 2010, 15:49, said:

Its funny that through all this projectile vs hitscan ...conversation, almost no-one has mentioned MoH's recent controversies, they seem to be rolling in them. DICE have changed the name of the Taliban to the "Opposing Force" in their multiplayer. Even tho its a small change its gotten a lot of gaming press.
Also gaming stores on US bases are refusing to sell the game due to its content being too close to home (IE, the war is still going on...). Were these intentional (publicity stunt?)? Can it hurt the sales (even more so?)? Etc.

But meh.

Meh is quite right. Were the game to be seemingly worth playing then perhaps I'd be more inclinned to voice my opinion on these events, but as the gameplay is so unnoteworthy, given it's competition, it hardly seems worth it tbh

[Pav:3d]

 Wizard, on 8 Oct 2010, 15:55, said:

 Pav:3d, on 8 Oct 2010, 15:49, said:

Its funny that through all this projectile vs hitscan ...conversation, almost no-one has mentioned MoH's recent controversies, they seem to be rolling in them. DICE have changed the name of the Taliban to the "Opposing Force" in their multiplayer. Even tho its a small change its gotten a lot of gaming press.
Also gaming stores on US bases are refusing to sell the game due to its content being too close to home (IE, the war is still going on...). Were these intentional (publicity stunt?)? Can it hurt the sales (even more so?)? Etc.

But meh.

Meh is quite right. Were the game to be seemingly worth playing then perhaps I'd be more inclinned to voice my opinion on these events, but as the gameplay is so unnoteworthy, given it's competition, it hardly seems worth it tbh

Fair point.
Seems the way its going it wont even scratch the sales of Black Ops.

[Stalker]

Imho its not a smart move to sell it a month before CoD. Most true FPS fans (and even console players ) will rather wait for BO.
BFBC2 was sold at the perfect time - when MW2 had successfully pissed everyone off.

MoH could be a nice FPS, but not when there is a new Call of Duty (or BF - doesn't really matter) available at the same time