Pretty true, I rarely find FAL players doing well w/o select fire. Also in MW3, the rifles themselves stacked up more so the MK14 was all but OP to start. I don't get the all of the FAL love, I do better with the SMR and the AN-94 is more reliable overall.
I miss the days of being called a noob who needs a modded controller to win. select fire on the fal and smr is not needed when anyone can tap the trigger faster than full auto. --- XBL - White Knight 01 ---- STEAM - white_knight_64 1000+ karma at last XD
I use no attachment fal sometimes as my backup when I pull out the sniper rifle.
Also I normally stick to irons but any semi or burst rifle with reflex is amazing and IMO more efficient than slapping select fire on with the exception of the swat, the only gun that truly benefits from select fire --- Want to learn how to procrastinate like me? I'll tell you how tomorrow
"no one ever complained about the FAL in previous games"
lolwut? MW2? Sure, by itself, it's not bad. A good gun if you're skilled, but just about every other person had a modded control to the point where it wasnt close to fair --- "There is no I in team, but there is a me in team. If you jumble up the letters."
I'll admit, before recent patches it was pretty cheap considering it seemed to have no recoil penalty and a small effect on range.
Now, however, I feel it is balanced because it lets people with slow trigger fingers Catch up a little to those who have fast trigger fingers (like me) however the penalties balance it out IMO because: - It's harder for us to aim while not strafing and firing fast (at least I do) / those who use SF have to compensate for accuracy also due to extra Recoil.
It's only people who use nodded controllers that make using the FAL cheap, and that's not even the point of this topic..
IMO the SF FAL just adds another niche in the game. I.e a slower firing SCAR-L with a minimal 2HK range.