Fallout Studios Forums

Stalker, on 9 Jul 2011, 15:03, said:

Bad for gameplay when SMGs start with twenty round mags and need an attachment to make them even semi-useful.

Stinger, on 9 Jul 2011, 16:07, said:

BO had a bad choice of SMGs anyway.

But of course gameplay is most important. Still, some realism would be nice.

I'm talking about a Glock 18 having proper mag size (In MW2 the 'unattached' version has an extended mag) which would benefit gameplay as well. Also extended mags on a P-90?

But unlike in BO, LMGs should start with decent mag sizes for balance reasons.

TheDR, on 9 Jul 2011, 16:07, said:

It's not really the pro that IW is making it, it's a pro that Treyarch is NOT making it .

Stinger, on 9 Jul 2011, 16:07, said:

Worse, the mag sizes in BO weren't even realistic to begin with . The MAC-11 uses 32-round or 16-round mags, not 20-round ones - same goes for the PM63 (15 or 25 in RL as opposed to 20 ingame), Enfield (20 as opposed to 30), G11 (45 or 50 as opposed to 48), HK21 (20, 50 or belt instead of 30), and CZ75 (15 instead of 12).

Xmag models reflecting the increased cartridge capacity would be nice though - IW have so far been too lazy to do this. With a bit of luck they will though.

Chyros, on 9 Jul 2011, 7:56, said:

I do agree that one thing BO done right was the extended mag business. And the sights that at least sorta differs, if you ask me. >.>

Admiral FCS, on 9 Jul 2011, 21:55, said:

M60 iron sights


G11 iron sights


Commando iron sights


FAMAS iron sights


AUG iron sights


Enfield iron sights



So, anyone else feel like getting destroyed defending Treyarch?

Chyros, on 9 Jul 2011, 22:30, said:

Their game has zombies.

Infinity Wards does not.
Edited by SquigPie, 09 July 2011 - 20:34.

Never saw the appeal of the zombies mode myself, but the fans of the game type pervade YouTube with their "ZOMBIES!!!" comments. It makes me think they are zombies themselves. Like attracts like.
Edited by Stinger, 09 July 2011 - 20:40.

SquigPie, on 9 Jul 2011, 22:33, said:

I'm glad of that. Zombies made Treyarch discontinue all post-launch support of WaW's main game just so they could make Zombies better. As such, the main game suffered horrendously and some lousy minigame became the only reason to play it.

Next.

They at least slightly nerfed Noobtubes and they had dedicated servers nevermind, their serverbrowser sucked.

Chyros, on 9 Jul 2011, 13:30, said:

I mean non-iron sights

There is no reason to blindly support a game but Black Ops has some elements in its gameplay which if added to MW, will make it even cooler. ( like ripping enemies apart just like it should be in real )

General, on 9 Jul 2011, 23:59, said:

Yes, but that was for SP only anyway (You know how some people feel about SP). They'll never have lots of gore in MP, I guess because of their inofficial target audience (12-18 year olds).
But you're right, additional gore could be nice to improve the war atmosphere.

General, on 9 Jul 2011, 23:59, said:

I'd much rather if the devs put effort into gameplay balancing rather than adding pretty effects which will probably wear off in the first week of playing.

Amdrial, on 10 Jul 2011, 17:58, said:

Balance it as much as you wish, there will always be noobs which will complain about anything you use when you killing them, personally game already balanced, there is always means to counter any class, you just gotta know which one is it.

General, on 10 Jul 2011, 18:42, said:

False. Several weapons in every game are uncounterable and have no weaknesses. To date no CoD game is balanced. Thinking that everything has a weakness is just a romantic ideal and NOT the reality of Call of Duty.

Chyros, on 10 Jul 2011, 20:53, said:

Yes some weapons are more powerful but you can see their stats yourself, if it has more firepower it has something else less, like more recoil. Can someone list what is unbalanced about weapons pls ? Because I think there is nothing too important and ruins gameplay.

General, on 11 Jul 2011, 7:34, said:

Are you seriously referring to the in-game stats bars now? Because you KNOW those are not true, right?

I guess even when looking at the actual stats every overpowered gun has some weaknesses, but they are minimal.

General, on 11 Jul 2011, 6:34, said:

When I lose battles just because I'm using a certain weapon I know there is something wrong with the balance. This becomes even clearer when I pull out a SCAR and then suddenly I have a 7 killstreak.
Edited by Stinger, 11 July 2011 - 22:28.

It depends on how you use certain weapons and with which perks aswell, I don't say balance is perfect but its good enough, I personally tend to kill easier with ACR, high accuraty but less firepower, some people just go with high firepower and trust their aim, balance also depends on player

General, on 14 Jul 2011, 11:23, said:

And some of us just go for high firepower and shoot in random directions.

Works like a charm.
Edited by SquigPie, 14 July 2011 - 10:16.

General, on 14 Jul 2011, 17:23, said:

When you include the player into balancing equations, all balancing is rendered void. A good player can kill a player with anything that does more than ten damage a shot and has more than ten rounds in the mag, or with a instakill knife. So all your complaints (and everybody's complaints ) shall be now rendered void, and situation resolved. No more balance problems, this is paradise!

SquigPie, on 14 Jul 2011, 18:16, said:

Destiny can't hit shit still with a FAMAS FELIN and extended mags shooting not-so-randomly

General, on 14 Jul 2011, 10:23, said:

You are aware that Assault Rifles in MW2 have no recoil at all.......

SquigPie, on 14 Jul 2011, 11:16, said:

You can't hit a shit with random shooting, only by chance maybe.

Wizard, on 14 Jul 2011, 12:17, said:

I seriously doubt how you come into that conclusion, difference of recoil between AK47 and ACR is vast.

General, on 14 Jul 2011, 12:20, said:

http://www.swfcabin..../1275223739.swf