|
Post by Indy_Bones on Jun 11, 2012 4:29:50 GMT -5
There's something that's been bothering me for a long time with COD, and it seems at it's worst in MW3 - same gun syndrome.
This describes the process whereby the COD community as a whole completely ignores 90% of the weapons in-game and instead focus their attention on just 3-4 of them.
In MW3 it's the ACR, PP90M1 and MP7 (with honourable mentions to the MP9, P90 and FMG Akimbo's), and this led me to think that instead of meaning this was the third installation in the COD series, it actually relates purely to the number of guns you're likely to see in use most maps - 3...
It was a similar situation in BLOPS, where the FAMAS, AK74u and Galil were king (with the AUG and COMMAK47 the next lowly subjects).
Then again in MW2 with the UMP45, ACR and Intervention holding the top spots.
In EVERY COD so far there are a trio of guns that see way more use than any other options, which leads me onto my second question - What's the fucking point putting 40+ guns in there if only 3-4 will get used by 90% of the community???
If the devs look to cater to the community as a whole, then we may as well just have a flat set of 5 guns and have done with it. So in MW3 we'd have the PP90M1 and MP7 in the SMG class, the ACR as the only AR on offer, an MP9 as the only secondary gun and the Barrett/MSR as a token sniper.
Now oddly enough the game is suddenly much more balanced, and in reality more closely represents how many games currently play out despite having a hell of a lot more options available.
Some will say that the community would be in uproar if they did such a cynical change, but I personally don't think most would care that much as the guns they only ever use anyway are still there...
Frankly I'm just bored of seeing the same guns map after map. This doesn't come down to balance, or arguments over guns being OP, simply that I'm just sick to death of seeing a game winning killcam with the same shit every time. I'm sick of only being killed by people who can't make a choice for themselves and just use whatever their Youtube hero or stats tell them to use, and I'm sick of some guns being virtually pointless compared to the alternatives (Dragunov I'm looking at you...).
COD is getting very tedious due to this, which combined with issues such as poor spawning, ropey matchmaking and BS killstreaks, it's making me not want to play the damn thing half the time.
Is it just me or is anyone else feeling the same???
|
|
wwaa
True Bro
PC / PS4 / X1
Posts: 2,086
|
Post by wwaa on Jun 11, 2012 5:03:25 GMT -5
It is a well known fact. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle5 lmg + 10 ar + 6 smg + 6 shotties + 6 sr = 33 primaries So rougly: Following Pareto principle (20% x 33 =) 6.6 weapons should be responsible for 80% of all kills with primaries .... and it looks correct: MP7, PP90M1, P90, Striker, ACR and MSR (or Barrett... or Type 95 on consoles) are responsible for 80% of kills with primaries, I could bet. With secondaries it is even more visible, 2-3 secondaries dominate. It is not IW's fault, Pareto Principle always rulez, you cannot "balance" all the weapons, whatever you do 80% of them 'll be considered useless 15 perks: 3 of them should be used by 80% of players … 20 game modes: 4 of them played by 80% of players ... etc etc ... Black Ops 2 will be dominated by ~20% of weapons as well, relax bro Pareto principle "is a natural phenomenon", after wiki.
|
|
cmck
True Bro
Hit him again!
Posts: 1,752
|
Post by cmck on Jun 11, 2012 5:21:21 GMT -5
I think I might be the exception to that law. I flat out refused to use the acr, type, striker, pp90, and fmgs for months at a time and I'm only now starting to dabble with a few of them just for boredoms sake. I also hated the feel of the famas and ak74u in BO. The ump and acr had no particular incentive for me to use them either. People need to experiment more.
|
|
wwaa
True Bro
PC / PS4 / X1
Posts: 2,086
|
Post by wwaa on Jun 11, 2012 5:30:11 GMT -5
yes, your kills are among 20% kills done with other weapons without people like you: 20% of weapons would be responsible for 100%, what is false
|
|
Robospy
True Bro
Look at that lovely cock
Posts: 723
|
Post by Robospy on Jun 11, 2012 6:48:12 GMT -5
In MW2 there were more of the common weapons, UMP, G18 and Grenade Launcher were really the only REALLY popular ones, but all the auto ARs bar F2000 came up often, all the snipers were popular, and shotguns, machine pistols and handguns received a decent amount of attention also.
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Jun 11, 2012 7:04:06 GMT -5
This describes the process whereby the COD community as a whole completely ignores 90% of the weapons in-game and instead focus their attention on just 3-4 of them. Is it just me or is anyone else feeling the same??? I'm not feeling the same. I really have no clue what guns people use to kill me. I also don't really care what other guns people use. Whether it's 17 million XBox users all using the ACR, or 17 million XBox users using all the guns equally......who cares? It doesn't affect HOW I PLAY. I still have the option of using whatever gun I want, from the long list they provided me. So as long as people are playing the game right, in the right game mode, not cheating, all that stuff.....they should feel free to use whatever gun they think will do best for themselves. If most of them want to subscribe to the herd effect, because some nasally voiced dork named 'SeaNanners' tells them to use some gun, they can go knock themselves out. As someone mentioned above me.....it doesn't really make any difference at the end. Even IF all these guns were perfectly balanced, a select few would grab the lion's share of use. That's just human nature. Don't sweat it, and go have fun.
|
|
|
Post by Indy_Bones on Jun 11, 2012 7:35:51 GMT -5
I really have no clue what guns people use to kill me. So you never ever look at a kill cam, or have never watched a final killcam then? And how do people know what works best for them? - by testing them out fairly for more than just a couple of games. If someone has never bothered using a gun, then how the hell can they ever know whether or not it would work well for them? I read that the BLOPS Uzi was the worst SMG, but I also then tried it out over a good number of games and came to the same conclusion. By the same method I was told that the Spectre was the superior weapon to the Mac 11, yet after trying both out - I much preferred the Mac. Had I not bothered trying it out I would never have come to that conlusion or used the Mac 11 over the Spectre. The key point being that just because stats and/or opinion may suggest something - I'll trust my own judgement even if it goes against the grain, yet a large part of the community doesn't apply the same logic, which leads to the same guns being used over, and over, and over again. I maintain that a player cannot claim that a gun works 'best' for them, if they haven't even bothered giving the alternatives all the same fair run out. Can't do that I'm afraid as it's a constant niggle for me. Would you like to play the same 2-3 maps incessantly for months on end or would you get bored and switch to something else? I hold the same view in regards to the guns as many do with the maps, in that I don't constantly want to play the same map, nor do I constantly want to see the same damn weapons every game, and when I do the game becomes tedious and predictable. That's why they should just stick 4-5 weapons in there, as that's all the majority use anyway, and they can then spend more time getting spawns, matchmaking and anything else right instead...
|
|
wwaa
True Bro
PC / PS4 / X1
Posts: 2,086
|
Post by wwaa on Jun 11, 2012 7:55:43 GMT -5
iw5000> Whether it's 17 million XBox users all using the ACR, or 17 million XBox users using all the guns equally......who cares? It doesn't affect HOW I PLAY. Strange, really? I always notice weapons that kill me and adapt to counter them.
|
|
asasa
True Bro
fuck
Posts: 4,255
|
Post by asasa on Jun 11, 2012 8:01:30 GMT -5
But that's entirely to do with how much you tried with those guns, how you played, and the enemies. I could find the m16 to be good because I'd play much more defensively, on only the larger maps, and against what I expect to be a weaker set of enemies. But in truth the gun is still bad, like the mac or uzi. wwaa: my counter is to pull out the acr myself. Never failed me yet.
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Jun 11, 2012 8:27:45 GMT -5
iw5000> Whether it's 17 million XBox users all using the ACR, or 17 million XBox users using all the guns equally......who cares? It doesn't affect HOW I PLAY. Strange, really? I always notice weapons that kill me and adapt to counter them. I don't linger watching the kill cams if i know where the person was when he shot me. I'm gone. I might go a little longer, to get a jist of where he is if it's uncertain... then try to respawn. I rarely ever watch it though. For the record, i usually am 'aware' of what gun killed me (I'm not stupid and can see it)...the point is, at the end of any games I play, i couldn't even begin to tell you (or anyone) what pct were ACR's, snipers, etc...it's never important to me. I might remember one death, at best....but by the time the next game starts, it's forgetten. And as far as 'countering' the weapon in the killcam....why? Counter a weapon? How? Almost all the encounters in MW3 are situational/positioning based. Weapons don't really matter. I judge WHAT the opponents are doing (tactics), not what weapons they use.
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Jun 11, 2012 8:35:24 GMT -5
I really have no clue what guns people use to kill me. So you never ever look at a kill cam, or have never watched a final killcam then? As I said above, if i know where they were...no. If i don't, maybe a half second, then i am gone. Why waste time watching something negative? (me being shot) Why would you even care what other people use? It's their tactics that matter for the most part (defensive, offensive, rushing, etc...) Then you got a much MUCH richer gaming experience, and the dipsh*t who just used the FAMAS for 100% of his kills, well, he probably shorted himself. His loss. No concern to you. That's a bad analogy. A map is something you are 'in' 100% of the time once a game starts. Someone killing you? A lot less time. 5%? I spend most of my games doing well. If I go 30-5, that means I only died 5 times, and only had five times to potentially 'see' what guns the opponents were using on me. In GW, there are nine opponents. What possibly could I gleam, from those five deaths.....of the behavior use of guns, of the opponents, from those five deaths? Not very much. It's kind of silly to even fuss over it.
|
|
|
Post by Indy_Bones on Jun 11, 2012 8:41:14 GMT -5
I could find the m16 to be good because I'd play much more defensively, on only the larger maps So what you're saying is that you play to the weapons strength's to get the best out of it... I know it's just an example, but the M16 isn't intended to be great in CQB, it's meant to shine at range where other AR's can struggle, so it only makes sense to play to what it does best, so I'm not sure what the point you were looking to make here was. I can understand your view on the Uzi, but the Mac? I use all SMG's in the same manner, I don't try less with any of them, I don't play differently because I've gone for a different SMG and the enemies are random anyway, therefore given a reasonable amount of playtime with each, things like KDR should give a fairly accurate example of which works 'best' for me. I've done better with the Mac and Skorpion than I have with any other BLOPS SMG's, to a reasonable level of difference as well, yet apparently both of these options are supposedly 'inferior' to choices like the AK74u and Spectre, which clearly demonstrates that although some options are better on paper, that's not always the case in practice. It's like choosing the AK47 over the Commando, they're virtually identical on a stats front, yet I hate the AK due to it's visual recoil and I perform much worse with it than the stats should suggest. Compare this to a close friend of mine who tears people new ones when using the AK, and we can see that personal preference can have a massive impact on performance, over and above inferior stats.
|
|
wwaa
True Bro
PC / PS4 / X1
Posts: 2,086
|
Post by wwaa on Jun 11, 2012 8:42:12 GMT -5
iw5000> And as far as 'countering' the weapon in the killcam....why? Counter a weapon? How? A lot of examples.... If they have 3 x Striker and you started with SMG + Silencer - swap to AR and keep the distance. Two crazy FMG9 Akimbo rushers spotted - use Striker, not your favourite LMG you started with …. Etc etc
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Jun 11, 2012 8:45:14 GMT -5
I've done better with the Mac and Skorpion than I have with any other BLOPS SMG's, to a reasonable level of difference as well, yet apparently both of these options are supposedly 'inferior' to choices like the AK74u and Spectre, which clearly demonstrates that although some options are better on paper, that's not always the case in practice. It's like choosing the AK47 over the Commando, they're virtually identical on a stats front, yet I hate the AK due to it's visual recoil and I perform much worse with it than the stats should suggest. Compare this to a close friend of mine who tears people new ones when using the AK, and we can see that personal preference can have a massive impact on performance, over and above inferior stats. I don't think anyone is arguing those points with you. In Blops, I used the G11, with low rez scope, a ton of time. I LOVED how it felt, the sound, aim, feel, etc..So because i had fun with it, I used it, regardless of what whiny clowns like SeaNanners said. The point i am disagreeing with you on...is why in God's name would YOUR playing experience be drastically lessened (to the point of not playing), because opponents may not be using a wide range of guns, to your liking.
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Jun 11, 2012 8:51:00 GMT -5
iw5000> And as far as 'countering' the weapon in the killcam....why? Counter a weapon? How? A lot of examples....If they have 3 x Striker and you started with SMG + Silencer - swap to AR and keep the distance. Two crazy FMG9 Akimbo rushers spotted - use Striker, not your favourite LMG you started with ….Etc etc I don't usually think like that, looking at the guns. First thing i always notice, first 30 seconds of a game, is the behavior/tactics of the opponents. How do they respond to getting the B flag (let's use Domination). Do they play for it? Camp for kills on it? Let me just take it? Right there, that tells a ton of how the game will play. 90% of the games, they are over in the first 30 seconds, once i see this. Their gun selection is kind of irrelevant here. Once i know the above, I usually try to enforce my TACTICS on them, make them adjust to me. If get the early lead, i see five opponents running like mad, with strikers.....I don't necessarily switch guns, I just adjust my setups, my tactics, where i might sit and move around on.
|
|
|
Post by Indy_Bones on Jun 11, 2012 8:59:45 GMT -5
I don't linger watching the kill cams if i know where the person was when he shot me. I'm gone. I might go a little longer, to get a jist of where he is if it's uncertain... then try to respawn. I rarely ever watch it though. For the record, i usually am 'aware' of what gun killed me (I'm not stupid and can see it)...the point is, at the end of any games I play, i couldn't even begin to tell you (or anyone) what pct were ACR's, snipers, etc...it's never important to me. I might remember one death, at best....but by the time the next game starts, it's forgetten. You don't need to identify an exact percentage, simply that in the vast majority of killcams, it's the same weapons being used the majority of the time. If you pay more than a seconds attention to this you'll start to see the patterns. A-ha! So if weapons don't really matter, why do the vast majority of players use the same guns? If the gun is almost superflous (And I pretty much agree with this in most cases), then surely we'd see more variety than we do? I genuinely can't believe that 80% of the people who pick an AR have some innate 'love' for the ACR, which makes it a better preference than any other choice in the class, therefore it logically must be some other factor. If you know where they were, then clearly the killcam has much less value than if you didn't know where you were shot from which is the whole point of it (and to try to prevent tactical loitering). Even in half a second though you can see what they were using even if it only registers on a much lower level. My issue is that it registers much higher for me, for some odd reason. Because I like variety - simple as. In a single game - not a huge amount, but add in another 50, 100, 1000 games, and you can easily extract data about what people are using, their general behaviour and what you're likely to expect in future games, thereby giving you a potential opportunity to take advantage of. I know for example that when playing Mission, I'm highly likely to come across at least half the opposition using PP90M1's, at least 1 sniping and maybe another 1 or two with an AR/SMG (probs an ACR or MP7). Using this information I can tactically plan my approaches and likely combat scenarios based on what I expect to come across. So if I expect a sniper shooting long down the right hand side of the map, I know to be cautious or avoid it unless I intend to counter-snipe. Similarly I know that the central area around the ruined church is likely to be heavily packed with the PP90 crew so again I can play my approach accordingly. I take a highly tactical approach to this sort of thing, and therefore data is like gold dust, and even basic killcam footage can help me going forwards. I don't expect many other players to go this heavily into it, but that's just how I do it.
|
|
|
Post by LeGitBeeSting on Jun 11, 2012 9:02:20 GMT -5
iw5000> Whether it's 17 million XBox users all using the ACR, or 17 million XBox users using all the guns equally......who cares? It doesn't affect HOW I PLAY. Strange, really? I always notice weapons that kill me and adapt to counter them. How do I stop getting killed by the FAMAS in BLOPS? Really, you must have 30KD at least if you've found out of to stop getting killed by that considering out of the 40 guns the FAMAS is single handily responsible for 85% of my deaths. What strategy do you employ to completely counter out the FAMAS? I'm curious. I don't know what play style you have but if you where to replace every ACR and MP7 user with let's say a MP5 user the game would be much different game with over half of every lobby runing the MP5. CoD game play styles are dictated by the community adapting to the top dogs. I mean just look at the old CoD4/5 maps remade for DLC. Cliffside doesn't play anything like it's remade counter part in BLOPS as the dominant class was the CQC SMG class in WaW as opposed to ranged campy AR's in BLOPS. Part of the way everyone played in MW2 was due to no recoil AR's, if you magically gave the AR's F2K ACOG recoil the gayme would be different gayme. People play the way they play in WaW because of the SMG class, people play the way they do in BLOPs because of the all powerful silenced AR, people play the way the top's guns in gaymes strengths lie.
|
|
|
Post by Indy_Bones on Jun 11, 2012 9:08:28 GMT -5
I don't think anyone is arguing those points with you. In Blops, I used the G11, with low rez scope, a ton of time. I LOVED how it felt, the sound, aim, feel, etc..So because i had fun with it, I used it, regardless of what whiny clowns like SeaNanners said. I think with respect - this is the point you are missing. A lot of players are simply using guns because they're being told to or because the stats suggest they should, but by doing so they miss out on potential gems like we've both found. In reality this makes no difference to us whatsoever, but I simply find it damn boring. That's it, nothing else, no major analysis needed, I just find it boring and I can't understand how someone can enjoy playing "Modern Warfare Only 1 Gun" constantly... It's not about guns 'to my liking', unless something is OP I have no issue with people using whatever they want, the key difference is that I'm tired of seeing the same guns, which are often used by mindless sheep who haven't even tried other options. The laziness annoys me, the tedium annoys me, and eventually seeing the 17000th killcam in a row where it's the same damn gun everytime just annoys me. I'm genuinely glad that others don't have the same issue, but for me it's beyond tedious. Call it OCD, call it whatever, that's just how I feel. I know a couple of guys who feel the same and wondered if it was just us or not, clearly you don't feel the same, which is more data I can use
|
|
cmck
True Bro
Hit him again!
Posts: 1,752
|
Post by cmck on Jun 11, 2012 9:27:04 GMT -5
You hate being killed by the same guns and I hate watching killcams or intermissions. Its beyond infuriating for the game to not let me leave during a final killcam. I will dash if the game won't let me leave before the final killcam. There is no way in hell I'm going to be forced to do something by a game. And try not to rationalize this by saying it takes less time to watch it than to load the game back up. The whole point was to not watch a killcam. And I'm rarely host due to switching lobbies every game so I'm not afraid of messing up others stats.... which they probably slave over anyway by ruining objective game modes.
|
|
wwaa
True Bro
PC / PS4 / X1
Posts: 2,086
|
Post by wwaa on Jun 11, 2012 9:27:18 GMT -5
@ legitbeastin > How do I stop getting killed by the FAMAS in BLOPS?
No idea, played BO 2 hours or so.
> What strategy do you employ to completely counter out the FAMAS? I'm curious.
I never said "completely counter", it is not possible. How to counter the most effective and versatile weapon in most ranges? Probably not possible with other weapons only. Tactics, skill, perks, equipment etc might be helpful ... Better positioning, etc ....
|
|
cmck
True Bro
Hit him again!
Posts: 1,752
|
Post by cmck on Jun 11, 2012 9:29:36 GMT -5
Famas will lose situationally to shotguns and snipers. That might be an option.
|
|
|
Post by pooneega on Jun 11, 2012 9:36:05 GMT -5
P.S. its well known that iw5000 is a beast in most things COD so he probably doesn't notice what other people are using because he's too busy going 50-3 in whatever game types he plays :-P I'm with iw5000. Sure it might get tiresome getting killed by the same gun but you're picking a fight with something that is beyond your control. I'm a console guy and there's only been a handful of guns in this game that I would consider so bad to where you're hampering yourself to use them (PM9, M60, almost any pistol, M16, etc.) but outside of that most guns are pretty tolerable and can go toe to toe with any gun that's considered to be the top in the group. The only brain dead gun I know of is the ACR, and on that I will agree I'm tired of seeing it. After that might be a Type 95 by a worthy opponent. I'm more tired of em because they are closer to being too strong to compete with against worthy opponents (or a host) and I feel only a smaller percentage of the guns in the game can give me a good chance against somebody around or near my same skill level. But that hardly comes along. The OP seems to have more of a problem with a certain human condition than the game itself. You can manage whatever your current K/D is with ~90% of primaries which I'd say is a pretty good testament to gun balance. I'm not saying things are perfect in this game by any means but your gun selection as far is what usable aint really all that limited. Having a problem with guns that other people pick shouldn't affect you at all because you have no say in that. Doesn't matter if a dude is using the Type or the Drag they can all catch a bullet like the rest of em. Just learn how to stay consistent with any gun you pick up and problem solved .
|
|
|
Post by LeGitBeeSting on Jun 11, 2012 9:36:07 GMT -5
@cmk So when I'm in FAMAS lobby I should use the Olympia? I already tried that!
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Jun 11, 2012 9:49:22 GMT -5
P.S. its well known that iw5000 is a beast in most things COD so he probably doesn't notice what other people are using because he's too busy going 50-3 in whatever game types he plays :-P let's cut out the sarcasm....at the end of the day, whether I am going 50-3 or 3-50....the point is, I despise wait times. Almost all of the time, i can see who killed me in the core game mode. I saw where i was shot. Why waste time and watch a five second kill cam, so I can dwell on it?I don't care if he killed me with a striker or a Ump. Doesn't matter to me. I am not going to gleam any useful data from knowing that. I just want to get back in, start playing asap. That's why I dont' like to play Hard-core that much....'dead time'. Why I especially hate S&D. I want to play the game, not sit and watch others play. S&D is fun, so is CtF.....but I get antsy just waiting...and waiting...and waiting (even if it's only 10 to 12 seconds, that's to long) So couple the above, not wanting to wait, with the fact I just don't really care what guns anyone else uses, it seems kind of pointless to let what they do, ...affect what YOU do. Agree. Good points. I agree with the OP's orginal premise...it is silly how people get sucked into the herd affect, but that's out of our control. You can't change how people think. But like you said, even IF everyone else uses the same gun (ACR), I think everyone can still have fun, and use almost all the guns in this game effectively. YOUR fun, shouldn't be adversely affected.
|
|
wwaa
True Bro
PC / PS4 / X1
Posts: 2,086
|
Post by wwaa on Jun 11, 2012 9:54:54 GMT -5
pooneega> Just learn how to stay consistent with any gun you pick up and problem solved Sure. Staying consistent with any weapon is one thing. Selecting appropriate weapons for different tasks - another.
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Jun 11, 2012 9:56:23 GMT -5
I don't think anyone is arguing those points with you. In Blops, I used the G11, with low rez scope, a ton of time. I LOVED how it felt, the sound, aim, feel, etc..So because i had fun with it, I used it, regardless of what whiny clowns like SeaNanners said. I think with respect - this is the point you are missing. A lot of players are simply using guns because they're being told to or because the stats suggest they should, but by doing so they miss out on potential gems like we've both found. In reality this makes no difference to us whatsoever, but I simply find it gosh darn golly gee whiz boring. That's it, nothing else, no major analysis needed, I just find it boring and I can't understand how someone can enjoy playing "Modern Warfare Only 1 Gun" constantly... I'm not 'missing' this point. I agree with you. People are missing out a lot of the fun of this game, trying new guns, experimenting, etc...But, unlike you, it's not something I DON'T understand. I don't find the above abnormal. It's typical. It's a human condition. People are creatures of habit. We like routines. We like to do the same things, over and over and over, by default. Then don't watch the killcams? As soon as you get shot, just try to respawn asap and move on. YOUR fun should be dictated by how you play, not by what guns other people prefer to use.
|
|
|
Post by jackaltornmoons on Jun 11, 2012 10:46:02 GMT -5
I'll take my MPL Rapid Fire against other people's FAMAS anyday
|
|
asasa
True Bro
fuck
Posts: 4,255
|
Post by asasa on Jun 11, 2012 10:51:07 GMT -5
I could find the m16 to be good because I'd play much more defensively, on only the larger maps So what you're saying is that you play to the weapons strength's to get the best out of it... I know it's just an example, but the M16 isn't intended to be great in CQB, it's meant to shine at range where other AR's can struggle, so it only makes sense to play to what it does best, so I'm not sure what the point you were looking to make here was. I can understand your view on the Uzi, but the Mac? I use all SMG's in the same manner, I don't try less with any of them, I don't play differently because I've gone for a different SMG and the enemies are random anyway, therefore given a reasonable amount of playtime with each, things like KDR should give a fairly accurate example of which works 'best' for me. I've done better with the Mac and Skorpion than I have with any other BLOPS SMG's, to a reasonable level of difference as well, yet apparently both of these options are supposedly 'inferior' to choices like the AK74u and Spectre, which clearly demonstrates that although some options are better on paper, that's not always the case in practice. It's like choosing the AK47 over the Commando, they're virtually identical on a stats front, yet I hate the AK due to it's visual recoil and I perform much worse with it than the stats should suggest. Compare this to a close friend of mine who tears people new ones when using the AK, and we can see that personal preference can have a massive impact on performance, over and above inferior stats. Eh, because when you use good weapons you often take "risks" and dont necessarily try to force engagements into a certain distance. If you are performing better with the Mac, that's a problem with your play on the Spectre. There may be occasional instances where the iron sights, or reload time actually get you a kill you would not have had with the Spectre, but that doesnt make it better or on par with it. I performed better with the AK. It's entirely down to the mentality of using a "manly" weapon. I spray it more, I activate my try-hard panties, and that gives me the illusion that it is better, if only mildly.
|
|
|
Post by Megaqwerty on Jun 11, 2012 20:33:26 GMT -5
It is a well known fact. Pareto principle "is a natural phenomenon", after wiki. Pareto's is irrelevant here: guns, much like in real life, are not causes in of themselves. A much better application of the principle to CoD would be 80% of the kills are performed by 20% of the players, which is possibly close to being true. That said, I agree with Indy: there is absolutely no need for there to be glutton of guns we are having in each CoD release. In MW3, in particular, there are some God awful redundancies. There are six hand guns. Six. What the Foxtrot was IW thinking? I personally believe that in a conservative gun design scheme as largely seen in these games (counterexample liberal gun design: the ballistic knife, the crossbow, the XM25), there should only be five pistols. And that's including machine pistols. There are three manual action shotguns in this game. Within the conservative design of this series, it would be difficult for a skilled designer to make each one both distinct and viable. For the hollowed husk of IW, it is clearly beyond the impossible. To that end, I do support reducing the number of guns dramatically, to perhaps three maximum per class. It would be child's play, even for IW/SH, to make weapon distinct in that scenario. Assault Rifle B would still be overpowered though.
|
|
|
Post by mw2baller on Jun 11, 2012 22:28:56 GMT -5
Firstly, weapon choice has very little to do with game skill. Apart from obvious differences like pm9 vs mp7, using an m4 instead of the g36 will make no difference. If I shot you in the back with the ACR, I could have just as easily done it with the scar.
Secondly, people use the gun that has the best feel for them. The ACR/MP7/PP90M1 have the best feel to them for the majority of people, so they're used the most. Simple as that. It has nothing to do with stats/youtube which influence less than 5% of the CoD playing population.
Thirdly, not everyone is some sort of CoD hipster who takes pride in their nonconformity. Gun use isn't a fashion trend or anything. I mean you're saying that using the ACR is bad just because everyone uses it. Even though the ACR is nearly identical to the g36, scar, and m4, and using those guns wouldn't change anything.
|
|