Printable View
Pfff, I haven't been around in awhile. I mainly popped in just to post my car and then decided to have a look-see.
And yeah, that was me not liking the cross-hair position. Some call it unique, but I don't think people were complaining about center-screen aim points and therefore I find it to be an unnecessary change and detrimental to my experience.
It's been like this for a decade now. Can people really just stop whining about it unless it comes onto PC?
Well that's nice. I think it's shit gameplay though if you get hit once by a gun and die. But you're right, it is an improvement over standard CoD gameplay (I played CoD2, 3, MW2), but what does that say about the game itself? If I wanted to play CoD after MW2, then I'd just play Halo SWAT games and save $60+. Really, after playing MW2 MP for 4 months, THAT was better gameplay. Like I said, says a lot about how shallow CoD gameplay is now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pooky
My point is that you were referring to the last decent CoD game (CoD4) to have decent multiplayer before it all went to hell with MW2, which is the current model of CoD games now. CoD4 was during the 2007 era of gaming when games had reached their peak of originality and were beginning to be chewed apart by critically thinking gamers. In other words, the CoD4 model is no longer followed just like the Halo 3 model is no longer followed. Your point involving CoD4 is obsolete.
TL;DR
Times have changed. The model of CoD and Halo games has changed. The CoD model is shit. The Halo model is trying not to be.
My thing is, the lack or creativity in the CoD franchise is staggering. A small band of say Neuro, Josh, Sel, and IDK, Infaf could piece one of those fucking games together. At least Halo is still somewhat original.
+RepQuote:
Originally Posted by TVTyrant
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkHalo003
No. Wanna fight over it?
:realsmug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Warsaw
That's a really narrow point of view. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it's shit gameplay.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkHalo003
For one thing, unless you have a superior weapon, Halo might as well be one shot kills. Whoever shoots first and can hit consistently is pretty much guaranteed to win. Players move far too slowly to escape on any but the most labyrinthine of maps. All having eleventy-billion health points does is drag things out.
I'm not saying it out of ignorance. If I said Sonic sucks because I think it has vanilla gameplay, that'd be ignorant. The current CoD model is bad because it's shallow and offers little no depth. It's just a bunch of running around an arena map, duck every now and then, run-around-corner-and-shoot-a-guy, grenade-fest, spray a guy with your cliche-favorite-gun, call in a Heli, find an isolated location and snipe anyone who isn't level 40+, and rinse. Repeat. That's CoD in a shitty sentence. Or better yet, here's a video of some "innovative" CoD gameplay:Quote:
Originally Posted by Pooky
Did you laugh at how serious and innovative/new it's trying to be? I did. Hard.
I disagree. For Halo, it completely depends on the gametype and map. If it's BRs in Halo 3, then you are generally correct. If it's DMRs in Halo Reach you are generally correct. But being generally correct isn't the same as being actually correct. In Halo, which is why I love the game, you can get hit by any gun save some power weapons and still live to fight a minute later. You get hit by a weapon, but your shield keeps you from dying instantly from a headshot and a weapon with high DPS doesn't molest you. On top of that, you have both regenerating shields and regenerating health. Even further, weapon values change based off of whether they're attacking your shield or health. But I shouldn't have to explain this to you at all considering how long you've played the game. Which brings me to question why you would argue your case besides the sake of arguing.
It's funny that you bring this up because I often get this exact impression from you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pooky