Are unlocks/prestiging more interesting in reverse?

So I'm sure that we're all familiar with the way that the call of duty series revolutionised the way that competitive multiplayer works by gaining levels and unlocking new guns and attachments as well as perks and once at a level where everything is unlocked you start again and get a shiny badge for it. In practice this means that those who put more time into the game generally end up having a much better gun than those who play less often, sure once they have prestiged they loose all perks and guns but with the amount they play that won't stay that way for long. In short for those who play a lot the game get's easier with better guns and perks and for those who only play casually there can be a barrier for entry and most will never see the best guns the game has to offer.

I wonder why nobody has tried this the other way round. Imagine the scene; you start with all guns and attachments unlocked, you can outfit your soldier however you want and get into a game. Once you level up however you have to sacrifice one of your guns. now for most of us this wouldn't be too difficult for the first few levels, bye bye sniper rifles, see you in a bit shotguns, farewell SMG's but what then? then you have to start giving up some guns you may use, some guns you care about, sacrifice claymores, last stand and a custom slot untill all you have is the two guns on your person, a grenade and maybe an attachment or two. Not only would this be more challenging but would also make you better at the game making you master one weapon and when the prestige rolls around you get them all back you have all the knowledge and skill you did before but with new weapon combos and perks to implement it with. It would also help make newcomers and non-regular players able to stand a chance on the battlefield when up against one of the pro's.

What do you think? would you like to see this implemented into a game? do you think cod or battlefield would ever go down this route?

People would be posting on forums screaming about why their guns are going away and asking why the game is broken.

This is a horrible idea for anything outside an April Fool's joke.

How much crack did you smoke today?

you never want to do negative things to the player. Though for a gamemode in a mech game, this could be cool in the sense that all the weapons you start with, as the battle rages on, you have to lose weapons, etc...

@SlashseveN303 said:

People would be posting on forums screaming about why their guns are going away and asking why the game is broken.

This is a horrible idea for anything outside an April Fool's joke.

I disagree with you, it would be a stupid idea even as an April Fool's joke.

I'm sorry, but that sounds like a horrible idea.

Terrible idea I don't know how you think this is a good idea.

Cool idea, but it would only work in a weird indie game. If CoD did that, people would flip a bitch.

CoD just needs a mode where A) everyone has everything (and doesn't require you to play for 20 hours just to unlock it..) Or everyone has to use default classes. I'm sure at least the latter does exist, but I do agree that there needs to be a better way than "Play more, do better, play better and get overpowered bullshit" mentality to CoD

Honestly it is quite an interesting idea in my oppinion but i dont think it could be as simple as reversing the COD formula, it would have to add another twist

Your argument is flawed in thinking that the guns are unbalanced enough (in a competitive FPS) to give an advantage to a new player versus a veteran.

it would have to add another twist

I think it might work better if you stuck with taking away perks or lowering base stats in some way. It could work as a kind of optional prestige type thing, people like to show off, right? But as others have said, it's no fun having things taken away from you.

 Sounds like a good idea if you give up other weapon types and perks to boost the ones you like.  For example you start with a basic access to all weapon types and perks but the perks are all level 1 out of say 3 or 4 total levels and the guns have no attachments.  Then as you gain experience you trade the breath of weaponry for depth in the weapons and perks that you wish to specialize in.  That might have some legs.

Well, if that were the case, I'd actually prestige. I hate losing all my stuff when starting over. I wouldn't mind so much if I didn't have to earn the pro perks all over again.

This reminds me of Eternal Sonata where the battle system started out fine and as you kept playing they made it worse and worse.. No game should do what OP described.

Dumb, although interesting from a balance level- give the most powerful stuff to the noobs and as they advance they're left with worse and worse weapons, even the playing field abit. Of course then you're screwing over the audience who's most loyal to you (those who play long enough to prestige or whatever)

I wouldn't mind trying it out but for now I'm going to go ahead and keep all my weapons. Including the Sniper rifles and shotguns that you don't seem to fond of. 

The only way this could be better is if you had to pay the developers every time you leveled up. That way you lose both money AND functionality from the game!

PS: Read "better" as "worse".

Because noone would have any interest in progressing in your game, the whole point of unlocks is to drive the user to stick with your game and gain more stuff. Losing stuff as you play more would scare people off.

The general concept of making it harder for better players though is a great idea which should've been done years ago. HOMEFRONT has a not horrible feature where good players get assigned as targets for enemies, killing them will bring you phat bonuses. And their last known general position is marked so no stationary snipers allowed.

I know people would hate it, but I would be all for it.  When I played MW2 I hated all the high level guys with the better guns, the better you are the more challenging something should get, not the easier it should be to kill people who are just starting out.  I think that should be an option, like in the Kingdom of Loathing where you can stop eating food or drinking booze for a playthrough and then get something special at the end which you can't get any other way.

sorry but that is just not right.

If you make it so that if you give up a gun you power your remaining ones (like applying the rules from the movie 'the one' but for guns) it can become a real interesting concept revolving how much you want to gamble your freedom of choice for power.  Don't expect it in CoD though.

That sounds just like the worst idea ever to me.

In CoD4, I used the AKS 74U with iron sights pretty damned exclusively. In MW2, the M4. It's so fun dominating 10th level prestigers with pink guns and a thousand attachments with the standard weapons.

@leviticus128 said:

So I'm sure that we're all familiar with the way that the call of duty series revolutionised the way that competitive multiplayer works by gaining levels and unlocking new guns and attachments as well as perks and once at a level where everything is unlocked you start again and get a shiny badge for it.

I hate that BF2 don't get credit for introducing these things, and pretty much the 'modern' setting.