Meteora's forum posts

#1 Posted by Meteora (5787 posts) -
@TwoOneFive said:
" @Meteora said:
" @TwoOneFive said:
" @Mikemcn said:
" @jakob187 said:
" @Mikemcn said:
" That all sounds...... fucking awesome. "
I agree with that sentiment entirely.  Treyarch did the shit necessary to balance some stuff out more...  ...except for vehicles.  Call of Duty doesn't need vehicles.  Call of Duty 3 and World at War proved that all too well.  Terrible, terrible idea...unless they can somehow find a way to make them a little less ridiculous.  Nonetheless, the changes to killstreaks, lack of Commando and One Man Army, and shotties/MPs going into primary slot are definitely good balance tweaks. "
I didn't play WAW or COD3 so im not sure how vehicles were in those games. Infinity ward said that vehicles made maps less centralized, so combat wasnt as intense. Which is why they didn't have them in COD2, COD4 and MW2 "
yeah say that to bad company 2. infinity ward had a bigass ego and they loved making shitty excuses.   but they wont make any excuse for the horrible idea that one man army and commando were. or marathon and lightweight. infinite noobtoobs and infinite impossible stabbing and running. greaaat, "
The only difference between the COD series and Bad Company series is that the map layout is radically different with different map design philosophies. With COD you basically have a more or less a freaking square with a few wide areas here and there. Regular mode would be 6v6 and the maps would feel empty when vehicles were added. Even 9v9 it probably didn't make much of a difference. Jeff even agreed that with vehicles, he often finds himself seeking for action than jumping right into it.
 
What about BC? Well, their maps a fucking huge alright, but they have a whole lot less corridors to hide in and the ranges you can shoot from are hugeeee. Not to mention, most of the map design is basically one big funneling area, especially true in Rush. Higher player counts (12v12 being the norm) also helps.. "
so you are agreeing with me :\ "
No, not intentionally at any rate.
#2 Posted by Meteora (5787 posts) -
@TwoOneFive said:
" @Mikemcn said:
" @jakob187 said:
" @Mikemcn said:
" That all sounds...... fucking awesome. "
I agree with that sentiment entirely.  Treyarch did the shit necessary to balance some stuff out more...  ...except for vehicles.  Call of Duty doesn't need vehicles.  Call of Duty 3 and World at War proved that all too well.  Terrible, terrible idea...unless they can somehow find a way to make them a little less ridiculous.  Nonetheless, the changes to killstreaks, lack of Commando and One Man Army, and shotties/MPs going into primary slot are definitely good balance tweaks. "
I didn't play WAW or COD3 so im not sure how vehicles were in those games. Infinity ward said that vehicles made maps less centralized, so combat wasnt as intense. Which is why they didn't have them in COD2, COD4 and MW2 "
yeah say that to bad company 2. infinity ward had a bigass ego and they loved making shitty excuses.   but they wont make any excuse for the horrible idea that one man army and commando were. or marathon and lightweight. infinite noobtoobs and infinite impossible stabbing and running. greaaat, "
The only difference between the COD series and Bad Company series is that the map layout is radically different with different map design philosophies. With COD you basically have a more or less a freaking square with a few wide areas here and there. Regular mode would be 6v6 and the maps would feel empty when vehicles were added. Even 9v9 it probably didn't make much of a difference. Jeff even agreed that with vehicles, he often finds himself seeking for action than jumping right into it.
 
What about BC? Well, their maps a fucking huge alright, but they have a whole lot less corridors to hide in and the ranges you can shoot from are hugeeee. Not to mention, most of the map design is basically one big funneling area, especially true in Rush. Higher player counts (12v12 being the norm) also helps..
#3 Posted by Meteora (5787 posts) -

Why not? I mean, I don't excessively say that I love games or anything like that, or go becoming a attention whore while I'm at it. I think its alright to say that I like video games. There's nothing really wrong with it. I admit that gaming has its fair share of problems and I'm fine when people tell me I spend too much time gaming.

#4 Posted by Meteora (5787 posts) -
@No0b0rAmA said:
" As long as you don't have to unlock the medkit and defibulator as medic, or the wrench as engineer, its all good. "
Yeah that part actually really pissed me off in BC2. I can understand some more advanced gadgets like mortar strike; but when you are a medic you expect to have the freaking tool to revive people, not level up to unlock it.
#5 Posted by Meteora (5787 posts) -

Probably at least until another... what, 5-10 years? That's when it begins to show on games. For it to become a standard; now just really depends on how many people are still stuck on XP and what the capabilities of a next-gen console are.

#6 Posted by Meteora (5787 posts) -
@Pessh said:
" I doubt it, they'll still have a shitload of refurbs. "
Yep.
#7 Posted by Meteora (5787 posts) -

I'm too nice to pull that kind of thing off. Not even witty enough either.

#8 Posted by Meteora (5787 posts) -

A mighty empire. 
 
Because it makes me feel more egotistical.

#9 Posted by Meteora (5787 posts) -

Well, its not like the controller is demand or anything. There isn't enough supply to warrant dropping down a controller's price.

#10 Posted by Meteora (5787 posts) -

Its subjective. I don't care what you say. You wanna be objective? Fine. You're missing out on a load of good music out there outside of your genre.