I don't think gun balance should have really been changed in the first place.

#11Soul_On_Display(Topic Creator)Posted 12/7/2012 3:23:08 PM(edited)
dueric posted...
Unfortunately, they will never learn their lesson.

Good news is, even 100,000 less sales would be enough for Activision to get involved. I know people think they're this evil empire publisher, and they are. But the fact remains, unless Activision has reason to take notice, we'll be getting the same BS every year.


To be honest, I think for CoD to finally be heading in the right track, they need to do some big things that they would never do. The biggest being that the devs would need more than 2 years to make a game, first of all. Between the budget which isn't much of a problem but also the low amount of time, they have to sacrifice something in production.

Maps are generally complicated to make, especially bigger ones. Complicated and time consuming, so that's why the devs probably made all the maps so tiny in BO2, which actually contributes to the chaotic pace by a large margin. Partially, it probably was lack of time, otherwise, some people actually like chaotic combat and think everyone else does too. Me? I like surviving for more than 3 kills in a row most of the time. They have budget, really, all they need is more time so that they won't have to cut corners with crucial things like that.
---
Xbox Live: Eighth Element || PSN: Echo_Resonance
~People will always nitpick where they have bias.~
#12duericPosted 12/7/2012 3:19:17 PM
Soul_On_Display posted...
dueric posted...
Unfortunately, they will never learn their lesson.

Good news is, even 100,000 less sales would be enough for Activision to get involved. I know people think they're this evil empire publisher, and they are. But the fact remains, unless Activision has reason to take notice, we'll be getting the same BS every year.


To be honest, I think for CoD to finally be heading in the right track, they need to do some big things that they would never do. The biggest being that the devs would need more than 2 years to make a game, first of all. Between the budget which problem isn't much of a problem but also the low amount of time, they have to sacrifice something in production.

Maps are generally complicated to make, especially bigger ones. Complicated and time consuming, so that's why the devs probably made all the maps so tiny in BO2, which actually contributes to the chaotic pace by a large margin. Partially, it probably was lack of time, otherwise, some people actually like chaotic combat and think everyone else does too. Me? I like surviving for more than 3 kills in a row most of the time. They have budget, really, all they need is more time so that they won't have to cut corners with crucial things like that.


I agree completely with a longer dev cycle.

Unfortunately, that's the one place Activision won't budge unless they bring in a third developer.
---
"It's like people using the internet have never heard of the internet." - SadHillShowdown Gamefaqs member