If MW2 came out after this game, would it be better?

#111Shura_SurplicePosted 2/2/2013 12:31:25 PM
DutchZombie posted...
Shura_Surplice posted...
MW2 fanboys: "it doesn't matter how stupid something is, if it has a counter then it's great!!"

Just let them be, anyone with a brain knows that game was a total mess and will always be one of the mediocre CoDs, only loved by the noobs.


The idiocy of this statement astounds me! If it has a counter, wouldn't that make it balanced and not broken?? Did your brain fail to make that simple connection? Whether something is stupid is a matter of opinion. Stop saying it like it is a fact. A fact would be that MW2 ran more smoothly than any other COD since. Stop trolling.


Hilarious how you don't even get it lol, I am not surprised.
#112DutchZombiePosted 2/2/2013 12:42:27 PM
Shura_Surplice posted...
DutchZombie posted...
Shura_Surplice posted...
MW2 fanboys: "it doesn't matter how stupid something is, if it has a counter then it's great!!"

Just let them be, anyone with a brain knows that game was a total mess and will always be one of the mediocre CoDs, only loved by the noobs.


The idiocy of this statement astounds me! If it has a counter, wouldn't that make it balanced and not broken?? Did your brain fail to make that simple connection? Whether something is stupid is a matter of opinion. Stop saying it like it is a fact. A fact would be that MW2 ran more smoothly than any other COD since. Stop trolling.


Hilarious how you don't even get it lol, I am not surprised.


I am sorry! Am I expected to understand complete nonsense? Be specific. Provide an argument for once (might be difficult, I'm sure). I'll be genuinely surprised if you can come up with anything other than just random trolling.
#113BrownPackPosted 2/2/2013 12:57:51 PM
BoyWitArabStrap posted...
Er, absolutely not, lemme tell you why

- Nuke
- Heartbeat sensor
- No wildcards/Pick Ten
- No VSAT
- Single Player Campaign was meh (Russian terrorists plot some s***, okayyyyy, but what about real life??)
- Danger Closelolol
- I like Blops2 maps WAY more
- Shotgunning in Blops 2 is way more fun
- No diamond camo
- No theater mode
- No custom games w/ bots
- No party games
- No customizable reticles (I really effing like this, I wish they had more)
- No two player online support
- Zombies > SpecOpslmao
- No MMS, long barrel, stock, or fore grip

The list goes on, really...anyone who thinks MW2 was the best is simply wrong. Don't let them tell you different.


2/10. You made it too obvious.
#114SpydogKPosted 2/3/2013 1:24:48 PM
From: BrownPack | #106
kennyindy posted...
Tim, I applaud your efforts highly in this thread. If this were a real life debate in an argumentation class, you would have won the debate in round 1...

Brownpack is lost in an alternate universe. The guy doesn't even understand that one can DOMINATE in a game and still find it broken. I could easily dominate in MW2, HALO 2, and all these other garbage, BROKEN games...

LMAO at MLC being avoidable and noobtubes "not being that big of a problem"... IIRC, literally the last match I ever played on MW2 was on Karachi, and EVERY PLAYER on the other team had noobtubes with OMA/DC PRO enabled... Don't pretend that it was barely used...

Seriously, if your argument is that these problems didn't exist, or "weren't that big of a deal", you're simply delusional...


My god do you sound so stupid right now. "Oh, I support Tim. I don't care what he's saying, but just because I agree, he automatically wins this debate"

First off, your goddess TimAndEric hasn't even mentioned anything in the game that is truly broken. Second, YOU haven't even noted anything that is truly broken. And you saying EVERY PLAYER having noobtubes with OMA/DC is a huge exaggeration. Not everyone likes to play like that. Many people actually like to earn their kills. I'm not pretending that it was barely used, it really BARELY was used.

I'm not delusional. You guys are the delusional ones for trying to complain about problems that aren't even really there, when it really just boils down to your personal skill level.


You clearly don't know what BROKEN in the context of a videogame means... just stop posting please...

And I WAS NOT EXAGGERATING... IT REALLY HAPPENED TO ME...

This is where the problem lies... Objective people try to tell the fanboys something existed, and the fanboys repeatedly try to tell them that it did not happen... It was not a matter of BARELY, MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY people were using that set up... You clearly must not have played this game in 2009-2010, because anyone who did would not even be arguing this right now...
---
You have no credibility to speak on Call of Duty if you've only been playing since Call of Duty 4...
#115DutchZombiePosted 2/3/2013 2:12:48 PM
kennyindy posted...


You clearly don't know what BROKEN in the context of a videogame means... just stop posting please...

And I WAS NOT EXAGGERATING... IT REALLY HAPPENED TO ME...

This is where the problem lies... Objective people try to tell the fanboys something existed, and the fanboys repeatedly try to tell them that it did not happen... It was not a matter of BARELY, MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY people were using that set up... You clearly must not have played this game in 2009-2010, because anyone who did would not even be arguing this right now...


Listen, we've all had games like that and, sure, it is annoying. But is it worse than facing a team of MLC knifers or CB snipers? I don't think so, but I can understand if your opinion differs. I've had games where there were entire teams camping with OMA/DC and we still won. OMA/DC is by no means a guaranteed way to win, just a very douchey way to play. We won by communicating and team work and not taking the camper's bait.
If you don't come to them, they will eventually have to move and then they are at a disadvantage. I've gotten Pavelow's on Scrapyard with a Spas against an entire team of tubers. I also noticed that more often than not tubers go negative like their quick scoping cousins. Point is, that smart play and team work still beats out OMA/DC any day of the week and that can only happen if the game was well balanced. While OMA/DC happened often, I never had trouble finding a good lobby. You might have been exaggerating a little bit...
#116BrownPackPosted 2/3/2013 9:18:30 PM
kennyindy posted...
You clearly don't know what BROKEN in the context of a videogame means... just stop posting please...

And I WAS NOT EXAGGERATING... IT REALLY HAPPENED TO ME...

This is where the problem lies... Objective people try to tell the fanboys something existed, and the fanboys repeatedly try to tell them that it did not happen... It was not a matter of BARELY, MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY people were using that set up... You clearly must not have played this game in 2009-2010, because anyone who did would not even be arguing this right now...


Ok, and you clearly know what broken in the context of a video game means then?

AND I'm NOT EXAGGERATING EITHER, YOU GUYS ARE FULL OF CRAP.

Here's where the problem lies. Objective people complain about a problem that happens to them, and seem to believe it ALWAYS happens this same way, based off of a few experiences. It is a matter of only a few bad cases of bad luck of running into scrubs who use bad set ups. You complaining about 2009-2010? How about you complain about the current then? How about you complain about something relevant? Because no one complains about things in the past nowadays...
#117SpydogKPosted 2/3/2013 10:59:36 PM
From: BrownPack | #116
kennyindy posted...
You clearly don't know what BROKEN in the context of a videogame means... just stop posting please...

And I WAS NOT EXAGGERATING... IT REALLY HAPPENED TO ME...

This is where the problem lies... Objective people try to tell the fanboys something existed, and the fanboys repeatedly try to tell them that it did not happen... It was not a matter of BARELY, MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY people were using that set up... You clearly must not have played this game in 2009-2010, because anyone who did would not even be arguing this right now...


Ok, and you clearly know what broken in the context of a video game means then?

AND I'm NOT EXAGGERATING EITHER, YOU GUYS ARE FULL OF CRAP.

Here's where the problem lies. Objective people complain about a problem that happens to them, and seem to believe it ALWAYS happens this same way, based off of a few experiences. It is a matter of only a few bad cases of bad luck of running into scrubs who use bad set ups. You complaining about 2009-2010? How about you complain about the current then? How about you complain about something relevant? Because no one complains about things in the past nowadays...


You just don't get it... and 2009-2010 is when the game itself was relevant and when people were playing it at its peak...
---
You have no credibility to speak on Call of Duty if you've only been playing since Call of Duty 4...
#118BrownPackPosted 2/3/2013 11:21:49 PM
kennyindy posted...
From: BrownPack | #116
kennyindy posted...
You clearly don't know what BROKEN in the context of a videogame means... just stop posting please...

And I WAS NOT EXAGGERATING... IT REALLY HAPPENED TO ME...

This is where the problem lies... Objective people try to tell the fanboys something existed, and the fanboys repeatedly try to tell them that it did not happen... It was not a matter of BARELY, MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY people were using that set up... You clearly must not have played this game in 2009-2010, because anyone who did would not even be arguing this right now...


Ok, and you clearly know what broken in the context of a video game means then?

AND I'm NOT EXAGGERATING EITHER, YOU GUYS ARE FULL OF CRAP.

Here's where the problem lies. Objective people complain about a problem that happens to them, and seem to believe it ALWAYS happens this same way, based off of a few experiences. It is a matter of only a few bad cases of bad luck of running into scrubs who use bad set ups. You complaining about 2009-2010? How about you complain about the current then? How about you complain about something relevant? Because no one complains about things in the past nowadays...


You just don't get it... and 2009-2010 is when the game itself was relevant and when people were playing it at its peak...


Um... the point of this topic is to discuss whether or not MW2 would be better than BO2 if it was released now. Many agree, many don't. The time it was at it's "peak" is still irrelevant, because that doesn't change the features of a game (excluding patches) Even then, we are still discussing whether or not MW2 would be better than BO2.

And games don't lose relevance as easily. Especially not MW2, because it is still considered to be one of the "newer" CoD's because of how it's built. Cod4 on the other hand is getting there.
#119arena11Posted 2/3/2013 11:47:25 PM
BrownPack posted...
kennyindy posted...
From: BrownPack | #116
kennyindy posted...
You clearly don't know what BROKEN in the context of a videogame means... just stop posting please...

And I WAS NOT EXAGGERATING... IT REALLY HAPPENED TO ME...

This is where the problem lies... Objective people try to tell the fanboys something existed, and the fanboys repeatedly try to tell them that it did not happen... It was not a matter of BARELY, MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY people were using that set up... You clearly must not have played this game in 2009-2010, because anyone who did would not even be arguing this right now...


Ok, and you clearly know what broken in the context of a video game means then?

AND I'm NOT EXAGGERATING EITHER, YOU GUYS ARE FULL OF CRAP.

Here's where the problem lies. Objective people complain about a problem that happens to them, and seem to believe it ALWAYS happens this same way, based off of a few experiences. It is a matter of only a few bad cases of bad luck of running into scrubs who use bad set ups. You complaining about 2009-2010? How about you complain about the current then? How about you complain about something relevant? Because no one complains about things in the past nowadays...


You just don't get it... and 2009-2010 is when the game itself was relevant and when people were playing it at its peak...


Um... the point of this topic is to discuss whether or not MW2 would be better than BO2 if it was released now. Many agree, many don't. The time it was at it's "peak" is still irrelevant, because that doesn't change the features of a game (excluding patches) Even then, we are still discussing whether or not MW2 would be better than BO2.

And games don't lose relevance as easily. Especially not MW2, because it is still considered to be one of the "newer" CoD's because of how it's built. Cod4 on the other hand is getting there.


COD4 is the basis of the entire franchise today.. This game attempted to go back to the basics while still maintaining certain aspects of current games, but utterly failed with the game not knowing what to be. MW2 is a complete overhaul of MW1 and feels like an evolution. It would be even after this game, which feels like a step backwards.
#120DutchZombiePosted 2/4/2013 2:18:13 PM
arena11 posted...

COD4 is the basis of the entire franchise today.. This game attempted to go back to the basics while still maintaining certain aspects of current games, but utterly failed with the game not knowing what to be. MW2 is a complete overhaul of MW1 and feels like an evolution. It would be even after this game, which feels like a step backwards.


You make a good point. One of the things COD4 did well was balancing offensive perks, stealth perks and objective perks against each other. MW2 was an evolution of that core formula. BO and its subsequent sequels removed all offensive perks from that formula, which is why they had their own balance issues. If you look at a perk like Cold Blooded (MW2), it's evident that it was the most powerful stealth perk ever featured in any COD, but it wasn't over used like Ghost in BO because the original formula was left intact.