 AnimeGalleries [dot] Net |  AnimeWallpapers [dot] Com |  AnimePedia [dot] Com |  AnimeGlobe [dot] Com |
Modern Warfare
Modern Warfare 2
the Same
Modern Warfare vs Modern Warfare 2
which do you think is better?i'm strictly and online player, don't really play the actual games so i'm gonna have to go with modern warfare.better maps and online play, playing it right now as a matter of fact.
Hi all.
Guys please help me out.
I am thinking of buying a new PS3 soon and i need some good and solid looking gameboy sp skin cover on it, So could anyone here please suggest me some websites providing gameboy advance sp skin covers for PS3 slim?
gameboy advance sp skin covers
Hi Robin20!Originally Posted by robin20
I have just the website you're looking for!
You can get Gamboy Advanced SP skins to cover your Sony Playstation 3 console from the following address
Doubleyadoublayadoubleya.Youlostthegame.christ/tryharder/sp_skins_on_a_ps3_really/8675309
And I liked modern warfare one better from a story perspective.
I didn't really like either at all, so....yeah. They're the same to me.
i still gotta give it to MW
Let me see about this one...
MW was the first to show its brand new multiplayer system and introduce modern warfare to the CoD franchise. Not only that, the story was epic, introducing our star of the Modern Warfare world, "Soap" MacTavish
MW2 continued that trend, making tweaks that needed to be looked into. Like, improved and more balanced multiplayer, if you want to go by that. The story also had some plot twists that threw players into confusion unless they played the mission 'No Russian'. It also brings back Soap, this time, with an identity (a face).
So overall...
I say Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2. Infinity Ward took Modern Warfare and polished it up to make a brand new war that we didn't expect.
WARNING: This user is wanted for unauthorized access into Ultratech archives. If you see this user in person, please contact Ultratech immediately.
^^^ good points, but your making in game points, i believe for online MW is better, but i didn't ask about just online i said which game you think is better so you have a very valid answer.
Modern Warfare 2 FTW.
Overall.
^ I liked that, deff.It also brings back Soap, this time, with an identity (a face).
I thought the story for MW was a lot better. MW2 was far too over-the-top for my liking and the plot seemed a lot less coherent at times. It was like Micheal Bay wrote the script for MW2. :\
In terms of multiplayer, they both had a lot of really annoying issues that could've been fixed if IW weren't lazy as all hell and decided to patch the game. However, I liked the more realistic weapon selection and gameplay of MW (no ninja knifing commando bullshit, unlimited noobtubes, guns with absolutely no recoil, etc) so I'll give it to MW again.
And where is my option for W@W?! Treyarch has made the best of the current generation CoD's imo.
Last edited by Condey; 03-22-2010 at 10:58 AM.
~Condey, The Northamerimori~
Yeah I agree it's all the same, there's nothing really tactical about this game. It's all about run-gun-die-respawn, repeat.
i hate W@W it's dumb, thats the only in game war game i'd play and old school ww2 1 but for online hell no it sucked.
Meh, W@W really perfected the mechanics implemented in CoD4 and the gun balance was a lot more reasonable. Overall it was the most refined and polished installment into the series, both technically and aesthetically. Just a few of my reasons why:
-Sure the MP40 was a little overpowered, but at least it had some recoil to deal with and it doesn't replace sniper rifles like the overpowered assault rifles of MW2. Other then that, the guns handled differently from each other, unlike in MW2 where they all feel like different skins of the same gun with near perfect accuracy.
-The spawn system flat out sucks for MW2. I don't think I'll get any argument on this point. Anyone who has killed a guy, only to be shot from behind a second later and watch that guy's killcam as part of your killcam will know what I'm talking about. Admittedly, the spawn systems used in W@W and CoD4 aren't THAT much better, but they are an improvement.
-War and CTF were fantastic game modes (even if they weren't new to CoD) that really supported the "run-and-gun" style that so many people claim is lacking in MW2.
-W@W HAD LOCAL SEARCH AND FOR A GAME THAT DOESN'T USE DEDICATED SERVERS THIS IS A NECESSITY!!!!1 IF YOU DON'T GIVE US DEDICATED SERVERS THEN AT LEAST HAVE THE DECENY TO MATCH ME UP WITH SOMEONE IN MY TIME ZONE. I DON'T LIKE DYING BECAUSE THE HOST IS FROM INDONESIA AND MY BULLETS TAKE A FULL 2 SECONDS JUST TO REGISTER.
-The hit detection in MW2 is shoddy at best compared to CoD4 and W@W. But don't worry, the auto-aim sticks you to a target so much that actual accuracy is more of a liability then anything else!
-The bugs were few at launch and quickly patched aftwerwards. This was thanks to a long open beta, something that IW felt their game was too good for... Look how "bug-free and completely unhackable" MW2 was...
-3 map packs and a lot of technical patches means that Treyarch cared about their customers, unlike IW who said "Thanks for the cash kthxbai" and did very little to address the problems with either CoD4 and MW2.
-Tanks added a tactical element that promoted teamwork but at the same time were easily disposed of with enough focus fire. They were also a throwback to CoD3 which was another great title in the series that most CoD-kids haven't even played... Also made by Treyarch! <3
-The killstreaks were normalized and rewarded the player without holding their hand and being essentially a free 8-10 kills. Sure MW2 has more killstreaks but they are wildly overpowered and in many cases game-breaking (the care package needs to be removed, period). Treyarch realised the old adage that less = more.
-The game was more grounded in tactical realism and the squad system punctuated this. No lone wolves going around ninja knifing with a ten-foot commando lunge, unlimited danger close noobtubes, etc...
-Bolt-action rifles were a lot of fun with or without a scope. Why couldn't they have any guns like this in MW2? Even CoD4 had more than one bolt-action sniper and a good assortment of semi-automatic rifles. (This criticism is mostly just me being grumpy because they took out the M14 which was my favourite gun in CoD4)
-A lot of people complained about juggernaut but failed to do the math behind it. It added an extra 25 points of health to the player, and with most guns, this means 1 extra bullet is needed to kill someone. If you had stopping power, these two perks cancelled each other out so the only time it ever really became an advantage was against people not using stopping power (and in CoD4's case it was a little more helpful because it affected explosive damage), and even then it wasn't much of an advantage if you could shoot consistent shots. But hey! IW solved this problem by adding painkiller, which in conjunction with MW2's terrible, terrible, spawn system could potentially place a guy you just killed right behind you with an extra 125 points of health (or the difference of about 4-6 bullets)! Hooray for fixing what wasn't broken and pandering to noobs!
Sorry about the essay, I just really hated CoD4 and MW2. W@W is the underrated pinnacle of the series. It's the FF9 of Call of Duty.
TL;DR: Give me a W@W option!
Last edited by Condey; 03-23-2010 at 01:14 PM.
~Condey, The Northamerimori~
Inaccurate guns in MW2 have a high recoil, meaning they'll start shoot more upward in the sky if you hold the trigger down for a long time or even a single shot. The M16 has some recoil to it compared to the FAMAS if you ACTUALLY noticed. Oh, by the way...
MP40 = UMP .45
Here some words that you should take in for better respawns...
1) Tactical Insertion, use them where the enemy can't see them.
2) Deathstreaks, make a comeback for the enemy that didn't expect it to come after respawning.
3) Killcam, watch it fully so you're away from the enemy.
MW2 has CTF so you shouldn't be complaining about that.
There's a reason why there is no search filters. It's most likey that people don't use them. If no one, or a small percentage of people, uses them, don't have it on the game.
Rule in MW2: Keep shooting until you actually get the kill.
IW is fixing problems that pop up so you can have a better gaming experience. They will fix the problems in the game so be paitent.
IW are adressing the problem right now: http://www.mapathy.com/suffer.html
THERE YOU GO!! PROBLEM SOLVED!!! SO STOP COMPLAINING AND START SHOOTING!!!!
IMO, tanks are a bit much. MW's maps weren't meant for tanks. And you can easily kill people in tanks if you're a good driver. It's like beating a team with a tank with a score of 750 to 400. MW actually helped players to make a 'Comeback', especially when the enemy had better stuff. W@W DID NOT.
By the sound of this you probably got nuked. Care Package isn't bad, you just need to be lucky with it. So you're saying that Emergency Airdrop should be removed as well if you want to remove the Care Package? You just eliminated two potential killstreaks that can help you win.
It's called creativity in killing people. It makes, in some cases, challenges easier.
They do have it in MW2 as well, the Intervention. And for your current mood over the M14, the FAL is one-headshot-kill with Stopping Power. There you go.
If you think about it, you're right, it's only 25 more HP. 25 more HP EVERY RESPAWN. This had people pissed. There's a reason for the 'Painkiller' Deathstreak (the player has to die 3 times in a row without a kill, enough time for the player to find cover and kill his attacker). At least people are happy now that this is balanced. Besides, WAYYYYYYYYYYY TOO MANY PLAYERS use Juggernaut. Also, if you don't want to be choked spawned, just watch the killcam.
FF9 is NOTHING compared to Call of Duty. They are two seprate things.
And no W@W for you. You'll just get nuked as a result.
Last edited by Light Buster; 03-24-2010 at 06:19 PM.
WARNING: This user is wanted for unauthorized access into Ultratech archives. If you see this user in person, please contact Ultratech immediately.
i heard MW2 is adding Overgrown and Crash to the map pack, i think if they were gonna add cod4 maps they should of went with wet work and bog.
- The recoil is negligible. Yes, some guns have a vertical climb, but when you factor in that people die usually in 2-3 shots with most weapons, the small vertical climb isn't even noticable and shouldn't even be factored in for most of the guns.Inaccurate guns in MW2 have a high recoil, meaning they'll start shoot more upward in the sky if you hold the trigger down for a long time or even a single shot. The M16 has some recoil to it compared to the FAMAS if you ACTUALLY noticed. Oh, by the way...
MP40 = UMP .45
A lot of the most popular guns in the game have almost no concievable recoil when you ADS. For each gun so there is very little margin for error. If this doesn't prove to you that shooting in MW2 isn't just mindless point and click, try playing some older shooters like CS or Day of Defeat and tell me how difficult it is to shoot compared to CoD.
Look at the spread of the guns and note that the guy who did it shot two consecutive clips of ammo and didn't compensate for recoil at all. He was shooting down the sights as well from a range of about 10 yards which is plenty of distance for recoil to take affect. Granted this isn't all the guns and I have a better chart including all of them (you should see the ACR, it looks like someone just drilled a hole in the wall with a laser) but AF wont let me link it for some reason.
-Tac inserts should be removed from the game. FFA has become a joke because right now you seemingly can't join a game without nuke boosters abusing them. This doesn't fix the spawning issue, it just creates a bigger one.Here some words that you should take in for better respawns...
1) Tactical Insertion, use them where the enemy can't see them.
2) Deathstreaks, make a comeback for the enemy that didn't expect it to come after respawning.
3) Killcam, watch it fully so you're away from the enemy.
-Deathstreaks reward a player for doing badly. A player should not be rewarded for doing badly and its essentially just having the game hold a players hand. Can't get a kill and you go 0-3? Ok, well the game will just give you painkiller or AKA one free kill if you happen to run into someone during its duration which is usually very likely considering the broken spawn system (more on that when I come to it).
-In regards to killcams, of course I watch them in entirety. The fact of the matter is that when I watch a killcam and it reveals that the guy I just killed spawned right behind me, thats usually a hint that the game has a problem. Also, there is a reason why few FPS's use killcams, its because they give away a persons position, i.e. giving the person that died an advantage on their respawn. In oldschool FPS's, players were left in the dark about how they were killed, as they should be.
-If you knew about the source coding in MW2, you'd know that spawns are set up to reward bad play. Essentially the game gives spawning priority to your ally that is closest to an enemy without being in combat. Guess who that enemy usually is? You, because you just killed that person and now hes spawning ten feet from you. The spawning is broken, it has one of the worst spawn systems in the history of FPS and none of these light fixes like tac insert can fix that.
-MW2 changed CTF. With the addition of perks like marathon and lightweight, a flag runner can clear the distance of the map in less then a minute and can do so entirely independently of his teammates. This is not good CTF play. In order to cap a flag, a team should have to support their flag carrier (Like in W@W), not just hand it off to speedy gonzales and point him in the direction of the base. This makes CTF games more about speed then strategy and coordination.MW2 has CTF so you shouldn't be complaining about that.
-War is still gone and it was still a fantastic game mode. IW really shot themselves in the foot by not adding it. Demolition you say? Pfft, its Search and destroy with another bomb...
-IW has a history of ignoring the community and having little to no transperency. Do you think I'm just some impatient child? From the original CoD1 onward, IW has routinely taken twice the amount of time as Treyarch to get things done as well as give their community DLC.IW is fixing problems that pop up so you can have a better gaming experience. They will fix the problems in the game so be paitent.
IW are adressing the problem right now: http://www.mapathy.com/suffer.html
THERE YOU GO!! PROBLEM SOLVED!!! SO STOP COMPLAINING AND START SHOOTING!!!!
When W@W launched, the two main problems were people getting outside the level, and a rarely used glitch called "Snaking", both were adressed within the first two months. You know how? Because Treyarch did an open beta and weeded out most of their problems before launch. 5 months later and IW still hasn't gotten it together, they also haven't been keeping in touch with their community. Look at their forums, they are a joke.
-Plenty of people use search filters. You know how I know? Because everytime I log onto W@W and use local search, I always seem to be in a game full of green bars and with the small community that W@W boasts now, thats saying something.There's a reason why there is no search filters. It's most likey that people don't use them. If no one, or a small percentage of people, uses them, don't have it on the game.
In MW2 I'm lucky if anyone is even remotely near the host. Its a good addition and in Peer-2-peer FPS its a necessity as that little bit of lag can be the difference between an easy kill and a "WTF, how did I die after putting three shots into his head before he turned around?" moment. IW had no reason not to add this to MW2, its just a smart thing to add.
-Any team that got beat in W@W because the other team had a tank was just whining. One guy can take out a tank with one satchel charge. Its not hard, and its not gamebreaking to add tanks. Tanks are the equivelent of BF:BC2's squad deathmatch APC, they create a strategic point of interest for players to gather around.IMO, tanks are a bit much. MW's maps weren't meant for tanks. And you can easily kill people in tanks if you're a good driver. It's like beating a team with a tank with a score of 750 to 400. MW actually helped players to make a 'Comeback', especially when the enemy had better stuff. W@W DID NOT.
In MW2, there is no strategic point as the maps have very little flow, few chokepoints and a lot of concealed windows making camping a much more friendly option. Thats why camping is so bad in MW2, because the maps are set up to support it.
-Don't make assumptions about my skill level based off of my arguments or the fact that I have a problem with the game. I'm a very good FPS player and even if I weren't, my skill level is irrelevant. My point that this game is bad is founded on an entirely technical standpoint and skill doesn't factor into that. "I bet you got nuked", Everyone has gotten nuked in MW2, its part of the game. My problem with the care package is that:By the sound of this you probably got nuked. Care Package isn't bad, you just need to be lucky with it. So you're saying that Emergency Airdrop should be removed as well if you want to remove the Care Package? You just eliminated two potential killstreaks that can help you win.
1) it is very exploitable for glitches just because of the purpose it serves. Everytime IW patches a care package glitch, a new one comes right up.
2) it rewards mediocre players by giving them access to higher killstreaks that they normally wouldn't be able to get to. Its random and it rewards luck rather than skill; this isn't poker, its a shooter and killstreaks should be about who is the better player, not about who got the luckiest care package.
And yes, the emergency airdrop should be removed as well. its abused just as much. If I say that care package x1 is broken, then its usually safe to assume that care package x4 is just four times as broken.
-Stopping power gives 25 extra damage every spawn. Lightweight gives a 7% speed boost every spawn. Ninja pro gives silent footsteps. Notice a pattern here? Your point is irrelevant because thats how the perks work. Juggernaut went down fine if you could aim consistently or if you sniped for the headshots or the upper body and got hit multipliers (as you should, I remember the days when a sniper had to go for headshots in an FPS).If you think about it, you're right, it's only 25 more HP. 25 more HP EVERY RESPAWN. This had people pissed. There's a reason for the 'Painkiller' Deathstreak (the player has to die 3 times in a row without a kill, enough time for the player to find cover and kill his attacker). At least people are happy now that this is balanced. Besides, WAYYYYYYYYYYY TOO MANY PLAYERS use Juggernaut.
It was not gamebreaking, it was simply removed because people whined too much and IW buckled at the knees to appease people who just wanted something to blame. 25 extra health isn't even noticable because people have a natural tendency to overshoot, anyway. Why do you think it can sometimes take a quater of a clip to kill a guy when the game only demands 2-3 shots? Because our brains naturally tell us to overshoot. Painkiller will mess you up regardless of how much you overshoot because it is such a staggering advantage. Like I said, when viewed in conjuction with the bad spawn system of MW2, there are going to be a lot of times where there is nothing you can do but die because painkiller is far worse then juggernaut ever was.
You don't seem to understand my point. My problem is not with being spawn trapped. I'm used to being spawn trapped because its a smart tactic. A smart team should always try to spawn trap the other team.Also, if you don't want to be choked spawned, just watch the killcam.
My problem is with having a guy that I just killed spawn behind me and often times with painkiller to boot. This is not good game design and its inexcusable because it happens so much in MW2. It makes the game needlessly frustrating and it rewards bad players with easy kills because the guy isn't expecting the person he just killed to be spawning around the next corner or right behind him.
And people are not happy with the balance. There are A LOT of people like myself who cant stand MW2 because it's a terribly unbalanced, skill equalized piece of garbage that helps mediocre players think they are gods of gaming when in reality the game is just so condescendingly easy. This is why the MLG doesn't use MW2 in any of its top-tier competitive leagues, because the game is just too easy to be an adequate marker of skill. Balance, honestly...
Check out this article, a lot of the top-tier developers of IW are now being fired over differences of opinion. I wonder if this is related to MW2? Hmm...
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/mo...ml?sid=6252657
-Its not 'creative' to go into a game where 80% of the players are just spamming danger close noob tubes to get easy kills. It is game breaking, because of its simplicity. I did a game last night where I went 40-6 just using danger close noob tubes with one man army just to prove a point. Why even bother to have guns when unlimited grenade launchers clearly outmatch them in every situation? I agree, it does make challenges easier. I have the masterkey shotgun on every rifle becuase the noob tube is so easy and so rewarding to use.It's called creativity in killing people. It makes, in some cases, challenges easier.
Also, when did we start judging military shooters based off of their creativity? If I wanted creativity, I'd play Okami or Psychonauts.
-'Keep shooting until you get the kill', again you're making wild assumptions about me as a player because of my criticisms. The hit detection is terrible and IW just made the game have a ton of of auto-aim to make up for it. I get kills fine, but at the same time I've noticed plenty of times that because of the bad source coding and terrible server latency, shots that should be killing a person just aren't hitting. This is a technical fault of the game, its not my problem that IW can't hammer out something as necessary as hit detection in their games.Rule in MW2: Keep shooting until you actually get the kill.
Want to try and experiemnt? Turn off the auto aim on your console (or alternatively play on the PC) and see how much the game helped you with aim assist. It is a staggering difference. The CoD series is notorious for giving the players way too much auto-aim on their console versions. This is why a lot of people refer to CoD players as CoD kiddies.
I agree that this point was largely subjective. It isn't a bad game just because I don't like the look of the weapons. I was just inserting one personal opinion to take as you will. :\They do have it in MW2 as well, the Intervention. And for your current mood over the M14, the FAL is one-headshot-kill with Stopping Power. There you go
Oh, and the FN fal isn't a 1-shot headshot. At close range with stopping power, it does 90 damage to the head. Close, but not quite there. My old beauty the M14 did 105 and god do I miss her.
-Lastly, my analogy about W@W being the FF9 of the CoD franchise was just me making a metaphorical opinion. I was saying that both games are highly underrated despite being some of the technically best of their respective franchises. This I can't really back up with any facts, its just a flippant opinion. I wasn't trying to actively compare them.FF9 is NOTHING compared to Call of Duty. They are two seprate things.
Still, I'd appreciate the option. Sadface =(And no W@W for you. You'll just get nuked as a result.
*Deep breath* Sorry Light Buster but I think a lot of your opinions are largely unfounded. MW2 is a terrible game and IW is starting to take the brunt of that. It was hyped beyong belief so the sales were good, but from a technical stand point it is a bad game and most of the serious gaming community doesn't even consider it a respectable shooter.
Sorry if I came off as overly agressive or antagonistic, that wasn't my intention. I don't mind having a constructive argument, but I don't agree with insults being a part of that so if I sounded in any way offensive I apologize in advance.
Last edited by Condey; 03-25-2010 at 05:46 PM.
~Condey, The Northamerimori~
IMO, it's a matter of getting used to.
One word for you. SitRep. You can destroy Tactical Insertions and prevent nuke boosting. But if you don't use SitRep, it's your loss, you're problem. I can't help you there. If you hate T.I. (Tatical Insertions), SitRep will be your best friend.
The whole point of Deathstreaks was to throw players that are doing good off. i.e. Martydom can kill a player not expecting it.
They either had a TI in place or they respawned next to their buddy, can't help you there unless you're hard on the trigger. At least it stops complaints of hacking/modded controllers and you get a glimps at the perks.
You probably the one who just runs in without getting knowledge about your surroundings. Look before you leap, or in some cases, just run in the other direction.
Lightweight + Marathon people maybe fast, but it doesn't mean they're invincible in getting flags/kills. A good aim might or will drop them.
Think about it, MW is not about War. It's about battle against terrorism.
IW did open beta for CoD4. I THINK you ignored this or missed it. Also, they do pay attention. Just give them time.
Because, IMO, IW does the searching for them (I'm not sure about this, I maybe totally off but I don't use search filters overall). I, just, don't, see, the, point, for searches. Maybe I already have a good connection.
It's not always the case, and you can sometimes exploit these spots. You just need the knowledge of the map first.
I'm not saying that you got nuked and you suck. I'm saying that people can get nuked as a result of complaining about the care package. Oh, about the care package glitches, here's something: http://g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/70...lable-Now.html
It turns out that time is money and in time, they'll fix things. You just need paitence and give them the chance.
Because it's not about skill, it's about having fun. Unless you play 24/7.
This has nothing to do with the game. Want proof? Here you go: http://g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/70...tivision-.html
It turns out that the contract between IW and Activision was prematuraly terminated and the former IW leaders are PISSED. Activision wanted the MW name so they can get the money and leave IW in the dust. Also, it seems that IW wants to create a MW game outside of Activision (from what I heard, they're going to start working for EA) or prevent them from creating MW-related games because they came up with the MW world while Activision just stole it from them. From what I heard, they are taking this to the courts to resolve this conflict.
There are weaknesses to certain setups. You're combo takes time to switch to another setup and in that one second, there can be a potential bullet to your skull. Also, this doesn't really work in Hardcore, as you can blow your own friends up on accident, unless you have really good aim and good friends.
I don't really see a problem here. I'm usually hard on the trigger. And I don't really use auto-aim that much, I pretty much ingoring it. You have good points, but they don't really help me here.
Well, sorry for overreacting to that, but I really dislike the FF series.
Correction, some of my opinions are actually existant. At least 2 links, a perk, and a couple of suggestions. And MW is pretty much more like storyline based, fast paced action, and realism (if you mind the perks).
You weren't overly agressive. It was good. But the reason why World at War is not as a good game as MW is because Treyarch failed to factor one thing that is required in a game. Originality. Treyarch's World at War heavily borrowed one thing for the Modern Warfare series. Multiplayer. If Treyarch made up a totally new multiplayer system, it would've became a great game. Sure, there's Nazi Zombie's, flamethrowers, Pacific setting, those were good. But the fact that the multiplayer system was used from the MW series hurt the game's chances of becoming a good game. I liked World at War myself, but MW IMO is the best game of all time.Sorry if I came off as overly agressive of antagonistic, that wasn't my intention. I don't mind having a constructive argument, but I don't agree with insults being a part of that so if I did I apologize in advance.
Last edited by Light Buster; 03-25-2010 at 06:53 PM.
WARNING: This user is wanted for unauthorized access into Ultratech archives. If you see this user in person, please contact Ultratech immediately.
Getting used to what? Pulling the trigger? Thats not too difficult. I remember games where I practically had to tape the gun barrel to the ground because the jump was so bad. MW2 shooting is the equivelent of child's play.
Just because there is a counter to something, doesn't mean thats it justified. Why should I be forced to used sitrep in every FFA just because there are nuke boosters? This argument seems like the onus is on me to work around people that are cheating (i.e. exploiting a part of the game). In a good FPS, there would be no nuke boosters because tac insert would be either fixed or gone. The responsibility is on IW to police their game, not for me to have to artifically limit myself by using a perk like sitrep just to ensure that I can play a game of FFA without people cheating.One word for you. SitRep. You can destroy Tactical Insertions and prevent nuke boosting. But if you don't use SitRep, it's your loss, you're problem. I can't help you there. If you hate T.I. (Tatical Insertions), SitRep will be your best friend.
This is also why I usually avoid console shooters. On the PC, those guys get booted by the admins... Oh wait, IW took out dedicated servers so there are no longer any admins! lol, Good call IW! You're matchmaking service IW.net is 100% unhackable as clearly evidenced on both your PC and console versions.
Why should someone who is playing good be penalized for it? Thats like having a rule for sprinters that the leader of the pack has to automatically be tripped 10 feet from the finish line just for being the fastest.The whole point of Deathstreaks was to throw players that are doing good off. i.e. Martydom can kill a player not expecting it.
Are you familiar with the old robot saying 'does not compute!'?
You can tell when someone has a TI placed by looking at their equipment as you said. In many cases they are simply spawning where the game places them. I shouldn't have to kill the same guy twice in 5-10 seconds simply because the spawn system is bad. In no other game has this ever been considered acceptable and IW isn't being innovative by doing this because again, its just rewarding players for playing badly by giving them a quick chance to get a revenge kill.They either had a TI in place or they respawned next to their buddy, can't help you there unless you're hard on the trigger. At least it stops complaints of hacking/modded controllers and you get a glimps at the perks.
Again, this is just an example of how skill equalized the game is. Even the spawn system assists bad players.
Again, you're making assumptions about how I play. I check my corners and scan the room, thank you very much. You'll never see me with some of the terrible tunnel vision that some players have. But if you can never be sure that a guy is about to spawn directly behind you in the room that you just killed him in, there is nothing you can do short of setting your sensitivy to max (as I do) and spending all your time spinning in place to make sure.You probably the one who just runs in without getting knowledge about your surroundings. Look before you leap, or in some cases, just run in the other direction.
I agree with this. I'll concede the point that it wasn't a strong criticism. However, I still think speed enhancements are counter-intuitive to the very idea of CTF.Lightweight + Marathon people maybe fast, but it doesn't mean they're invincible in getting flags/kills. A good aim might or will drop them.
So? In the battle against terrorism have you ever heard of a guy take out an entire terrorist cell with a knife doing commando lunges? Does anyone respawn in the battle against terrorism? Has the United States made any headway in Iraq by capping the terrorist's flags? No, because the game isn't a tour of duty simulator, its a game, one with game modes that aren't grounded in 100% realism. War could work just as well in MW2, IW just got lazy.Think about it, MW is not about War. It's about battle against terrorism.
I was talking about MW2 when I made this point. And if you recall in my original post, I looked at CoD4 pretty favourably. My real problem is with MW2. I'll play a game or two of CoD4 anytime.IW did open beta for CoD4. I THINK you ignored this or missed it. Also, they do pay attention. Just give them time.
And seriously, they aren't very good with their community. They have a bad history of banning people off their forums for making legitimate criticisms, not letting their community in on anything, having very few admins to deal with trolls, etc. On the game side, they do have a much worse history with patching the game.
Also, I'm sure you can agree that the reason open betas exist is to see how a community is going to try to abuse the game and to weed out and noticable unbalances. If MW2 had one, I can garuntee that most of my complaints wouldn't have existed. IW just got lazy because of the success of CoD4.
Nope, their matchmaking system is garbage and it doesn't assign any priority to proximity. This is why you see so many people with a bad connection. This is also why you'll enter games where there will be one host with full green bars and 50-100 ms latency while everyone else is in the red with 500+ ms.Because, IMO, IW does the searching for them (I'm not sure about this, I maybe totally off but I don't use search filters overall). I, just, don't, see, the, point, for searches. Maybe I already have a good connection.
Its also why I'm playing BF:BC2 for my console FPS because DICE has dedicated servers for their games and that means lag never factors in and there is no problems regarding who is host, because there is no host.
I agree, but a tank is a very big target and with the right amount of focus fire, it will go down. All it takes is a very basic level of coordination.It's not always the case, and you can sometimes exploit these spots. You just need the knowledge of the map first.
Nuked because I complain about the care package? I don't understand. Could you elaborate please?I'm not saying that you got nuked and you suck. I'm saying that people can get nuked as a result of complaining about the care package. Oh, about the care package glitches, here's something: http://g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/70...lable-Now.html
It turns out that time is money and in time, they'll fix things. You just need paitence and give them the chance.
And I think the very reason that the patches are so slow in coming is precisely because of the money they made with MW2! They knew how successful this game was going to be before it launched so they felt less inclined to get to work quickly.
This contradicts a lot of your earlier points that the games is perfectly balanced as long as you play at an adequate skill level.Because it's not about skill, it's about having fun. Unless you play 24/7.
And hell, I'm not having fun if I'm spending more time getting frustrated about the atrocious unbalances and glitches present in the game then actually playing. Even when I'm having a landslide victory with a great (by my standards 4.0 or higher) K/D ratio, I still find myself complaining about how bad this game is.
Noted, guess I was wrong.This has nothing to do with the game. Want proof? Here you go: http://g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/70...tivision-.html
It turns out that the contract between IW and Activision was prematuraly terminated and the former IW leaders are PISSED. Activision wanted the MW name so they can get the money and leave IW in the dust. Also, it seems that IW wants to create a MW game outside of Activision (from what I heard, they're going to start working for EA) or prevent them from creating MW-related games because they came up with the MW world while Activision just stole it from them. From what I heard, they are taking this to the courts to resolve this conflict.
I'm not even going to argue this. Instead try doing this: Play 5 games with your usual loadoats and then play 5 games with a noob-tubed assault rifle with one many army and danger close and then tell me whether or not there is any good counter to noob tube spamming.There are weaknesses to certain setups. You're combo takes time to switch to another setup and in that one second, there can be a potential bullet to your skull. Also, this doesn't really work in Hardcore, as you can blow your own friends up on accident, unless you have really good aim and good friends.
You're always using auto-aim. Unless you go into your console options and manually turn it off, its always there whether or not you notice it. Seriously, try going into your console options, turning off auto aim and tell me how much it affects your game. It is a very big difference.I don't really see a problem here. I'm usually hard on the trigger. And I don't really use auto-aim that much, I pretty much ingoring it. You have good points, but they don't really help me here.
CoD holds a player's hand so much and so few people ever realize it. *Sigh*
Meh, its not everyones cup o' tea. I understand.Well, sorry for overreacting to that, but I really dislike the FF series.
Originality is one thing, but if it isn't tempered by the forces of balance and good solid game design, then its just a really innovative mess.You weren't overly agressive. It was good. But the reason why World at War is not as a good game as MW is because Treyarch failed to factor one thing that is required in a game. Originality. Treyarch's World at War heavily borrowed one thing for the Modern Warfare series. Multiplayer. If Treyarch made up a totally new multiplayer system, it would've became a great game. Sure, there's Nazi Zombie's, flamethrowers, Pacific setting, those were good. But the fact that the multiplayer system was used from the MW series hurt the game's chances of becoming a good game. I liked World at War myself, but MW IMO is the best game of all time.
I could write a book about a wizard who shot watermelons from a cats tail into the mouth of a zombified Saddam Hussein. This would be very original, but would it really be anything more then a juxtaposition of a bunch of a wierd elements? Moreover, would it be any good despite its originality?
Thats why MW2 is so messed up, because the developers added too much to the game without taking the time to think about how players would utilize or react to these things or about how these things would fit together cohesively as a sum of their parts.
By that same token, thats what Treyarch did so well with W@W. They took what IW had designed and trimmed and added to their formula to make the game more balanced and to allow the multiplayer to be more of an adequate test of skill. Sure its not very original in the purest sense of the word, but it was functional and it was solid and polished to a fantastic degree. I personally can't wait to see what Treyarch does with their new game Call of Duty: Vietnam. I'm sure they will do the same thing, take the formula that MW2 was built on and refine it to near perfection.
*Looks at the time* Crap, I really ought'a be studying.
Good argument though, Light Buster. I love a good argument.
Last edited by Condey; 03-25-2010 at 08:07 PM.
~Condey, The Northamerimori~
*Skips over the ridiculously long posts"
I choose MW2 over the first one because of one main factor, and that factor is all the customization the developers added. Simple.
Social expectations diminish an individual's ability to think as an individual.
I choose Cod4 for what i believe is a more enjoyable campaign and what i see as a more balanced multiplayer. As for W@W I see Cod4 on just about the same but think it surpasses MW2 by on a number of points. Then again I prefer the co-op and campaign of CoD games over the multiplayer and didn't care too much for all the killstreaks and other additions put in MW2. Also I found MW2's veteran campaign too easy compared to CoD4 and W@W's.
Set made by me
"Do you know who I am? I'm the man who's going to burn your house down! With the lemons! I'm going to get my engineers to invent a combustible lemon that burns your house down!"
yea some reallly long posts lol
You'll have to deal with that, Simon! You forced me to express my long winded opinions. It was entrapment!
~Condey, The Northamerimori~
lol,good debate though.
I think MW2 would be much better if it had dedicated servers and chance to make mods. That's why I love CoD4. But I don't say MW2 sucked - it was pretty fun for one/two months. I hope MW3 will have those good things MW2 missed.
yea i hate the death streaks thing it's dumb.
I think death streaks were useless, since they didn't actually help you at all. Final Stand is exception. But I think IW should think something better than getting 10 seconds 3x HP boost. It is pretty lame, to be honest.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks