|
|
Post by darkpixelblade on Jul 4, 2012 6:28:40 GMT -5
All i have to say is:
Maps
Spawns
Assassin
MP7
ACR
Lag
I'm gonna go find a better shooter to play…
|
|
cmck
True Bro
Hit him again!
Posts: 1,752
|
Post by cmck on Jul 4, 2012 6:35:43 GMT -5
Good luck....
All the shooters that I can think of have their own problems as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by darkpixelblade on Jul 4, 2012 6:39:32 GMT -5
Good luck.... All the shooters that I can think of have their own problems as well. I'm liking tf2... Only problem is that someone asks for my hat every 6 seconds |
|
cmck
True Bro
Hit him again!
Posts: 1,752
|
Post by cmck on Jul 4, 2012 7:03:20 GMT -5
I still need to look up tf2. Its on my list of things I want to do, but not right now. Right now I'm trying to find an rpg or strategy game for ps1 or gba that I haven't already looked into. Its not going well.
|
|
b0xr
True Bro
[2.0+ KD, 2.0+ WL, ~350 SPM] Stats mean nothing. GLHF :)
Posts: 204
|
Post by b0xr on Jul 4, 2012 8:17:42 GMT -5
All i have to say is: Maps Spawns Assassin MP7 ACR Lag I'm gonna go find a better shooter to play… DMH Final Stand Stealth in Support EMP in Support But in the end, CoD is still more fun to play than almost any other shooter. I admit I liked Halo in the past, it seems more skill oriented: less weapons=better balance, higher health=higher accuracy required. So it's fun if you're really good, but compared to CoD it's lacking a lot of the things that make the game fun. Killstreaks, many weapons to try, equipment that changes play styles, PERKS (strategies that go with them), etc. There's a lot of things in CoD that can change how you play. The only other shooter that comes close IMO is Crysis 2. It's like CoD mixed with Halo, with better graphics, plus Ghost in the Shell type cloaking/running/jumping. I dig that shit, too bad it's kinda laggy or I would play it a lot more. |
|
Mousey
True Bro
Estrogen High
Posts: 10,317
Member is Online
|
Post by Mousey on Jul 4, 2012 8:44:14 GMT -5
CoD is my shooter for Foxtrotting around. Halo for a decent skill shooter while mainly lone wolfing (still is aim assist city as much as CoD is). TF2 or L4D for heavy team based games.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kay-Oh! on Jul 4, 2012 11:02:50 GMT -5
I bet Counter Strike would be the best skillgame... Even though I never played it.
|
|
|
|
Post by brokenbladez on Jul 4, 2012 11:09:12 GMT -5
Go play some Gears of War 3. Few weapons, highly skill based. Not as much as Gears 2, but it still makes any other console shooter look like child's play.
|
|
|
|
Post by ragnarok on Jul 4, 2012 11:22:53 GMT -5
I bet Counter Strike would be the best skillgame... Even though I never played it. Not really... You only need decent aiming skills, and some ability to aim for the head, to win gun fights with the 2 guns you'll probably stick with (M4 and the AK47, that's what EVERYONE uses) and just the regular mentality of burst firing in long range. The snipers are easy too (with the obvious exception of the Steyr Scout). As for objectives... people never plant the bomb unless it's a 2v2 or lower scenario (my experience). |
|
asasa
True Bro
BITCOIN!?
Posts: 3,729
|
Post by asasa on Jul 4, 2012 11:50:19 GMT -5
Err, "decent aiming skills" and "aim for the head" dont exactly go along.
|
|
|
|
Post by mxm on Jul 4, 2012 12:09:56 GMT -5
I would also recommend trying Gears 3. Games like CoD and CS all have this "If I see the enemy before he sees me, I'll win the gunfight nearly everytime"-mentality. In Gears everybody has so much healh, that you often need a more tactical approach than: 1. Spot enemy 2. aim 3. shoot. Nevertheless I think MW3 is one of the best Online-shooter I've ever played... I've played it for 300 hours, there must be sonething good about this game  |
|
|
|
Post by tiesieman on Jul 4, 2012 12:32:14 GMT -5
I would also recommend trying Gears 3. Games like CoD and CS all have this "If I see the enemy before he sees me, I'll win the gunfight nearly everytime"-mentality. In Gears everybody has so much healh, that you often need a more tactical approach than: 1. Spot enemy 2. aim 3. shoot. Nevertheless I think MW3 is one of the best Online-shooter I've ever played... I've played it for 300 hours, there must be sonething good about this game The base mechanics are great. Nice gunplay, easy drop in/out matchmaking, crisp performance on consoles, etc etc These base mechanics have been established since CoD2/4. So it's kind of sad that both Treyarch as well as new IW struggle to make a good game when they're handed a great basic structure from the start. As for Gears of War 3, it's a great game, but compared to 1 (we will ignore 2) it does have a lower skill floor. Too bad Gears 1 had one of the poopiest of netcodes :/ Also, be warned; if you want to get on the official dedicated servers, you're gonna need >all< the DLC. And seeing how the game can be pretty shit when on p2p connections, you're gonna need to buy the DLC. |
|
-3055-
True Bro
Executioner is master race.
Posts: 1,305
|
Post by -3055- on Jul 4, 2012 14:14:54 GMT -5
Acr mp7? Yeah they're good, but I honestly don't think they're anything to blame a game over. Most of the weapons in the game are practically one hit kill. I wish there was less aim assist & much more recoil & more btk for all guns. That's a much better game
|
|
asasa
True Bro
BITCOIN!?
Posts: 3,729
|
Post by asasa on Jul 4, 2012 14:32:12 GMT -5
Acr mp7? Yeah they're good, but I honestly don't think they're anything to blame a game over. Most of the weapons in the game are practically one hit kill. I wish there was less aim assist & much more recoil & more btk for all guns. That's a much better game Acr mp7? Yeah they're good, but I honestly don't think they're anything to blame a game over. Most of the weapons in the game are practically one hit kill. I wish there was less aim assist & much more recoil & more btk for all guns. That's a much better game Acr mp7? Yeah they're good, but I honestly don't think they're anything to blame a game over. Most of the weapons in the game are practically one hit kill. I wish there was less aim assist & much more recoil & more btk for all guns. That's a much better game Acr mp7? Yeah they're good, but I honestly don't think they're anything to blame a game over. Most of the weapons in the game are practically one hit kill. I wish there was less aim assist & much more recoil & more btk for all guns. That's a much better game YES |
|
Robospy
True Bro
Look at that lovely cock
Posts: 723
|
Post by Robospy on Jul 4, 2012 20:55:40 GMT -5
I think it would be beneficial to the game too if you had to a actually learn to aim and fire rather than spraying and gettin easy kills, the recoil in cod may as well be non-existent the way it is now, every gun recoils in a circle so burst-firing is pointless
|
|
|
|
Post by mw2baller on Jul 4, 2012 22:06:27 GMT -5
The thing is that in mw3 they greatly shortened the average engagement distance. In a typical firefight you have both aim assist helping you as well as the fact that firing 20 bullets a second at a guy 10m away is kinda foolproof. If I use an Mk14 and keep my distance, I practically never die since people can't aim for shit.
|
|
acidsnow
True Bro
Guardian Angel
Posts: 726
|
Post by acidsnow on Jul 4, 2012 22:15:01 GMT -5
...Just as a mental refresher I went back and played 2 hours of BOps this morning, and I gotta say MW3 looks, sounds & plays much better than BOps. The difference is quite noticeable; sure MW3 has some weapons that aren't super-useful, but overall the game plays better than any previous CoD.
|
|
|
|
Post by Broadband on Jul 5, 2012 6:32:36 GMT -5
Idk somehow I'm enjoying this game more than Black Ops and MW2, but it's nowhere near as good as WaW or CoD4.
|
|
zeroix
True Bro
The Truth
Posts: 1,140
|
Post by zeroix on Jul 5, 2012 8:15:12 GMT -5
MW3 plays better than any previous CoD? Gonna have to go with no. I prefer MW2 and also Blops to MW3. Most people have gameplay gripes with MW2, but I don't, and that game is darn crisp when it comes to networking/latency, which is the #1 factor in my ability to enjoy CoD. MW3 and Blops are always a mixed bag in that regard and it sucks when you're on the bad end of lag despite paying for the fastest Internet in your area... and I just don't have nearly as many network issues playing other online games outside of MW3, so my only conclusion is that in trying to improve things (being optimistic here) the devs have messed things up for at least *some* of us. At least when I'm host in Blops and I shoot a guy, I know what to expect, whereas in MW3 it feels like I never can be exactly sure of how many bullets it'll take to kill someone.
Haven't played WaW or CoD4 so I can't compare. Haven't really played much CoD, period, as of late. I got a new PC which can actually run modern games and if I'm playing the Xbox these days it's to play Dawnguard since it's not out for the PC yet or Soul Calibur. Making CoD my #1 multiplayer experience for so long left me numb to the BS, lol.
Also ditto to what mw2baller said about the MK14. That thing rose to the top of my gun list after I realized its power vs. auto-aim.
|
|
|
|
Post by mw2baller on Jul 5, 2012 8:39:38 GMT -5
The lag in this game is terrible. I've started paying attention to my deaths and over half of them are caused by lag or spawns.
|
|
b0xr
True Bro
[2.0+ KD, 2.0+ WL, ~350 SPM] Stats mean nothing. GLHF :)
Posts: 204
|
Post by b0xr on Jul 5, 2012 10:50:58 GMT -5
Apparently lag compensation is handled differently in MW3 than the previous CoD's. It tries to balance out the lag between all connections. Instead of Good connections/Fast internet having next to no latency and people with slow connections suffering from all the lag, in MW3 the people who have fast internet actually suffer the most because they're slightly penalized to compensate for other people's bad internet.
TL;DR In MW3 people with good internet will probably notice the lag more than other people.
|
|
acidsnow
True Bro
Guardian Angel
Posts: 726
|
Post by acidsnow on Jul 5, 2012 10:56:42 GMT -5
MW3 plays better than any previous CoD? Haven't played WaW or CoD4 so I can't compare. ...Honestly, it's very difficult to say weather MW3 is (or isn't) better than CoD4, mainly because CoD4 is a simpler game -having less guns/no custom kill streaks- excluding the shotguns in CoD4 I still think it's the best CoD. The levels are awesome too, and if you like shooting though walls, CoD4 has that as a bonus. Coming from CoD4 I was initially intrigued by W@W, but after playing it more I realized it was pretty awful. ...But for someone who didn't play CoD4, I guess I could see how W@W would be a decent game. But calling MW2 a "better game" than MW3 is just pure horse shit. MW2 is overrun with players only using OMA+tubes, which totally trashes the game. ...If OMA was removed, MW2 would be a way-WAY better game than it currently is. I simply can't stand the frequency of death due to tubers, it's just idiotically common, and gets old really fast. The maps are great, the guns are fun, but OMA+tubers destroy the game for me. I've played ~ 95 DAYS of CoD on the Xbox since 2007, and this is how I'd rate each game's MP gameplay experience from best to worst: #1. CoD4 #2. MW3 #3. BOps #4. MW2 #5. W@W |
|
zeroix
True Bro
The Truth
Posts: 1,140
|
Post by zeroix on Jul 5, 2012 11:32:10 GMT -5
I firmly disagree. Not only can I play MW2 for hours without encountering a dedicated tuber (as their numbers have declined sharply), but tubers are no different from any other player. In fact, I fear a couple tubers on a party far less than a couple of adept players with ARs... most tubers look for "holy grail" lobbies and are quick to bail at the first sign of trouble, not to mention tubing is usually the beginning and end of their expertise (and they rarely do that well, either).
Plus, when someone's lagging, it's visual and the whole lobby can see. MW3 tries to disguise the lag which doesn't really help in mitigating the actual problem.
|
|
acidsnow
True Bro
Guardian Angel
Posts: 726
|
Post by acidsnow on Jul 5, 2012 12:31:00 GMT -5
...I play a lot of GroundWar, so tubers are more of a problem in that lobby. But nevertheless, they're still 20x more frequent in MW2 than BOps/MW3. So if tubers are your bane, then MW2 is dire.
As per lag, 'eh: it can be annoying at times. MW3 does a decent job of making "all players feel it equally", which I think makes the game a bit more fair. ...It's been a while since I've played MW2, so I can't recall the exact feel of its' lag, but generally CoD keeps it fluid enough retain a vail of lag-equality; it's one of the aspects of the CoD franchise that I enjoy, just like how all console players are using the same hardware/controller (an even opportunity for all).
|
|
|
|
Post by bobo on Jul 5, 2012 12:40:44 GMT -5
I love COD, but I'm glad some of you are recommending Gears of War. Yeah Gears has some things to complain about too, but overall, I like Gears 3 over any shooter at the moment (and it's been a long moment). On servers, the game runs fairly smoothly. The higher skillgap (with a few exceptions) is HUGE imo. This game probably has the highest learning curve of an shooter, but the reward in the end was well worth it to me. COD will probably never reclaim the title as my fav shooter after playing Gears.
|
|
zeroix
True Bro
The Truth
Posts: 1,140
|
Post by zeroix on Jul 5, 2012 13:52:22 GMT -5
acidsnowI typically play TDM and Dom when that gets boring. I never was a big fan of Ground War, but nonetheless when a tactic is 1) not that common and 2) very beatable, I don't see how it could be one's "bane." Oh, and a game shouldn't be attempting to "distribute the lag evenly" because that's not only going to create a lot of problems on a practical level (at least at this point in time), but lowers the overall standard of play for the majority of players. In MW2, I play with a friend who lives nearby, and one of us typically ends up host if we stay in the lobby and our connections are good enough to result in a high level of playability for the whole lobby. For some reason, MW3 doesn't seem to want to roll like this, and chances are if I end up as host I'm probably bailing from the lobby in frustration post-game. Random observation: if I'm trying to play MW2, am host, and my gf starts torrenting things, mid-game host migration is inevitable... but MW3 will let me finish out the game without migrating despite the game becoming incredibly laggy for everyone. Don't know what the deal is, but from my perspective whatever they were trying to accomplish my changing the netcode in MW3 didn't really work as intended. :/
|
|
|
|
Post by iw5000 on Jul 5, 2012 14:37:37 GMT -5
I would also recommend trying Gears 3. Games like CoD and CS all have this "If I see the enemy before he sees me, I'll win the gunfight nearly everytime"-mentality. In Gears everybody has so much healh, that you often need a more tactical approach than: 1. Spot enemy 2. aim 3. shoot. Nevertheless I think MW3 is one of the best Online-shooter I've ever played... I've played it for 300 hours, there must be sonething good about this game This |
|
|
|
Post by cashmoves on Jul 5, 2012 15:43:42 GMT -5
is gears 3 better than gears 2? the multiplayer in 2 was AWFUL. not only did it take 5+ minutes to get a game, once you got in a game, you realized how garbage the controls were.... anyway, im down for new games, but gears 3 must be worlds better than 2 to even be in the same vicinity as cod. so i guess my question is, did they really improve the game THAT much?
|
|
|
|
Post by bobo on Jul 5, 2012 19:41:37 GMT -5
is gears 3 better than gears 2? the multiplayer in 2 was AWFUL. not only did it take 5+ minutes to get a game, once you got in a game, you realized how garbage the controls were.... anyway, im down for new games, but gears 3 must be worlds better than 2 to even be in the same vicinity as cod. so i guess my question is, did they really improve the game THAT much? I got used to Gears 2 and grew to love it. Now there were title updates that fixed a lot of problems, but not all. If you played only at the beginning, then yeah it deserved a bad review. Dedicated servers make the game run much smoother in Gears 3 and with my strict NAT type, I don't have to wait forever to find a host, the servers put me in a match right away. I'm not sure what you don't like about the controls in Gears 2, but I'll give a comparison. I can say I like the controls in 3 waaaaay better. first, the character movement speed is faster, Gears 2 was the slowest of the series. Wall bouncing and sliding into cover is quicker, smoother, and more responsive now. Players don't teleport as much when close beside each other (I've heard it called "player collision" in COD lingo). Some of the buttons have been changed that make the gameplay smoother (grabbing a meatshield, picking up an ally, executions, etc). There's not just 3 sensitivity settings now...there's 30!!! THIS IS SOMETHING COD SHOULD IMPLEMENT!!! Oh sorry for the mini outburst/rant. I've played Gears 2 a few times after getting into 3, and 2 blew a fat one. It is the weakest game in the series. |
|
|
|
Post by bmac39 on Jul 5, 2012 23:19:39 GMT -5
^^^^ CoD has 10 sensitivity settings...
|
|
