Call of Duty V10 - Hop in, there's still room in the bandwagon! - Games

[QUOTE=ashxu;39502958]I don't know what you're trying to say. Arguing about realism in games that don't aim to be realistic is silly.[/QUOTE] Maybe we should stop making games that are set in a realistic, modern/near-future world, then? [SUP]attract all the hate, for the lulz[/SUP] [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Why reply" - Craptasket))[/highlight]

[QUOTE=MarioInATopHat;39497601]mercs are my favourite team in this game WANNA GET PAID MOVE IT[/QUOTE] The biggest thing I didn't like about BO2 is that they made the factions really boring. I know it's a little thing but I really liked how CoD had different themes and announcers for every faction. 4 factions in BO2 are American and Militia/OpFor is pretty standard by now. The only one I like is SDC is because new and I actually understand what they're saying :v:

[QUOTE=Steamtex;39502911]Yeah, not sure what you're talking about with a pass. And #2 isn't incorrect, at least not right now. Might change in 20 years, but think about it. Does it make sense for a weapon to work like that? No. Because really, the military will either fire a weapon in bursts, fully automatically, or semi automatically, and a majority of the time, the latter of the three. Therefor, it is impractical and a waste of time to make a weapon in real life that has a high ROF at first and slows down as the weapon is fired. CoD logic, but I think both games can be fun.[/QUOTE] Did the fact that BO2 is set 20 years in the future go past your head? Also, number five is not exclusive to BF3. On all of the maps, there are buildings you can't destroy, and in cod, you have a lot of ways to counter "noob tactics".

[QUOTE=Steamtex;39502982][SUP]attract all the hate, for the lulz[/SUP][/QUOTE] "Oh shit oh shit I've been exposed as a whiny kid with terrible opinions and I have absolutely no way to defend the cool arguments I read online... I know, better make it seem like I was intentionnaly being a fucktwat just to upset people! Haha, that'll show them!" And this, my friends, is what they call "trolling" nowadays. Kids who have no other way to back out from their stupid actions. Well guess what Mr. Gigantic Fucktwat, you're an idiot, please get out of this thread and nobody will miss you. [editline]7th February 2013[/editline] And get informed on what the FN HAMR IAR really is, it will blow your mind. "But switching from closed to open bolt doesn't change the rate of fire of the weapon!", you might say (if you knew what you were talking about, which you clearly don't). Well for a start, the developers know that, and there's actually a voiced character line in the game that explains how the weapon really operates. And more importantly, [i]nobody gives a fuck[/i] because a weapon with a variable fire rate is really fucking fun. [editline]7th February 2013[/editline] This was only to counter your most terrible and uninformed "reason", by the way. I could go one like that for hours without tiring, I enjoy exposing little fucktwats who think they're better than everybody. But this is the internet, so guess how many fucks I give. (Hint it's a natural integer and it's not strictly positive) Now if you will excuse, me I'm going to have fun playing whatever game I feel like playing at the moment. [editline]7th February 2013[/editline] (By the way I LOVE Battlefield 3 and it's probably one of the games in which I had the most fun) [editline]love[/editline] [QUOTE=JustGman;39502337]most of what people like or dislike boils down to personal preference.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=HorizoN;39502335]Nobody cares which is better. They're different types of games. [/QUOTE] [QUOTE=ashxu;39502264]who gives a shit which one is better just let people have their fun[/QUOTE] Also I love you guys

[QUOTE=Steamtex;39502982] [SUP]attract all the hate, for the lulz[/SUP][/QUOTE] Backpedaling like the idiot you are. Good going.

the hamr works so well with the silencer, grip / stock and red dot, pretty much zero recoil and great accuracy due to the increased accuracy over time thing, also using combinations of attachments that i wouldn't normally use leads to some surprising result, like the vector with select fire

[QUOTE=Charm6000;39504032]the hamr works so well with the silencer, grip / stock and red dot, pretty much zero recoil and great accuracy due to the increased accuracy over time thing, also using combinations of attachments that i wouldn't normally use leads to some surprising result, like the vector with select fire[/QUOTE] normally I hate full view scopes even on snipers but damn is the HAMR fun with a Dual Band. never used variable zoom on it, I imagine it's similar enough. [editline]7th February 2013[/editline] PS the HAMR's slowing rate of fire does make sense: In 2008, a variant of the FN SCAR—the Heat Adaptive Modular Rifle (HAMR)—was one of four finalist rifles for the Infantry Automatic Rifle (IAR) competition. The IAR was a United States Marine Corps requirement for a lightweight automatic rifle for squad automatic rifle use. The FN entry was different from existing SCAR versions in that it [b]combined closed bolt operation (fires from bolt forward/chambered cartridge) with open bolt operation (fires from bolt to the rear, no chambered cartridge), switching automatically from closed to open bolt as the weapon's barrel heats up during firing.[/b] There have been previous firearms with mixed open/closed bolt operation, but the automatic temperature-based operating mode switch is an innovation. When you consider the fact it switches due to the barrel heating up, there you have your explanation for the HAMR's slowing rate of fire. To avoid overheating and the switch between the two bolt operations. Now fuck off and don't come back.

[QUOTE=Saza;39504333]When you consider the fact it switches due to the barrel heating up, there you have your explanation for the HAMR's slowing rate of fire. To avoid overheating and the switch between the two bolt operations.[/QUOTE] Firing in open bolt doesn't mean it fires slower. No, it doesn't make sense.

the more important question is: who cares?

Keep in mind Battlefield 3 is the game where soldiers can immediately and accurately send live intelligence on where enemy troops and vehicles are to their entire team and vehicles magically appear when you capture a strategically inconsequential zone represented by an indestructible flag pole. Call of Duty has it's silly video game contrivances too but a machine gun that fires fast then fires slow is the least of these.

are they going to add more hardcore gamemodes

[QUOTE=Steamtex;39502911]Yeah, not sure what you're talking about with a pass. And #2 isn't incorrect, at least not right now. Might change in 20 years, but think about it. Does it make sense for a weapon to work like that? No. Because really, the military will either fire a weapon in bursts, fully automatically, or semi automatically, and a majority of the time, the latter of the three. Therefor, it is impractical and a waste of time to make a weapon in real life that has a high ROF at first and slows down as the weapon is fired. CoD logic, but I think both games can be fun.[/QUOTE] Yeah nah, you're a cheeky cunt. Go use Google some time.

[QUOTE=landstorm;39504844]are they going to add more hardcore gamemodes[/QUOTE] I really wish they would, because I tend to enjoy hardcore more than the normal gamemodes, moreso because the bullets are a bit more sensible and understandable. [editline]7th February 2013[/editline] Oh, and I got a copy of Black Ops II finally! No more relying on my uncle for the game.

[QUOTE=Steamtex;39502911]Yeah, not sure what you're talking about with a pass. And #2 isn't incorrect, at least not right now. Might change in 20 years, but think about it. Does it make sense for a weapon to work like that? No. Because really, the military will either fire a weapon in bursts, fully automatically, or semi automatically, and a majority of the time, the latter of the three. Therefor, it is impractical and a waste of time to make a weapon in real life that has a high ROF at first and slows down as the weapon is fired. CoD logic, but I think both games can be fun.[/QUOTE] I know right, what's the point of limiting firerate when your gun is of a certain temperature?? Not like it'd catch fire or anything. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kzfm4pYhIyY[/media] Oh wait...

[QUOTE=Steamtex;39502056]My top 10 reasons why I (AKA Strelnikov, or Steamtex) believe Battlefield 3 is a better initial game to play when compared to Call of Duty for a mediocre FPS player. DUN DUN DUN[/QUOTE] Even if you're attempting to troll, I do think this is a good point to bring up: I tried playing Battlefield 3 once - and boy was I confused right off the bat. I understand there's a learning curve and I bet that if I were to get over that hump I might enjoy BF3, but I never had that issue when I first played Call of Duty. (back during MW2) With Call of Duty, I literally picked up the padal and began shooting people. Everyone can play it, really. I consider Call of Duty to be a guilty pleasure of mine because by no means is it a caliber game, but it's a fun and simple one. It's not pretending to be something it's not - it is what it is. And that is with no disrespect to Battlefield 3.

[QUOTE=wauterboi;39505744]Even if you're attempting to troll, I do think this is a good point to bring up: I tried playing Battlefield 3 once - and boy was I confused right off the bat. I understand there's a learning curve and I bet that if I were to get over that hump I might enjoy BF3, but I never had that issue when I first played Call of Duty. (back during MW2) With Call of Duty, I literally picked up the padal and began shooting people. Everyone can play it, really. I consider Call of Duty to be a guilty pleasure of mine because by no means is it a caliber game, but it's a fun and simple one. It's not pretending to be something it's not - it is what it is. And that is with no disrespect to Battlefield 3.[/QUOTE] Makes me think of this: [img]http://i.imgur.com/W2WoO.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=Steamtex;39502056] [B]5.[/B] If someone uses a noob tactic, there's a tactic to counter that. Is someone camping in a building with his leet .338 Lapua Magnum anti-materiel rifle? Hmmm, why not just make the building [I]no longer exist?[/I] [b]Addendum:[/b] This was directed as my thoughts as to which would be better as an initial game for a somewhat new player. Both games have a learning curve, but I've found that, due to how CoD's game mechanics work, CoD is much harder to get in to than a Battlefield game.[/QUOTE] I should probably mention that the "building no longer exist" thing doesn't really work that well in BF3. In BC2/1 you could leave nearly every building but that point is nearly complete bullshit when it comes to BF3.

could of at least pointed out cod has terrible world animations Reloading a revolver? Let me slap a mag in and chamber a round. Reloading a over under shotgun? Let me stuff shells into the trigger guard and pump the imaginary pump.

What I don't get is, the HAMR slows down it's firing so it "doesn't overheat" whereas the LSW fires faster than it and doesn't slow down but also doesn't overheat, clearly the LSW is packin' lube.

[QUOTE=Steamtex;39502056] [B]2.[/B] Weapons actually make sense. [/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Steamtex;39502911]#2 isn't incorrect, at least not right now.[/QUOTE] [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AFPGc15bn8[/media]

wait that's actually an attatchment for a shotgun? :v: haha

My goodness his pronunciation of words is hilarious.

[QUOTE=GHOST!!!!;39506524]What I don't get is, the HAMR slows down it's firing so it "doesn't overheat" whereas the LSW fires faster than it and doesn't slow down but also doesn't overheat, clearly the LSW is packin' lube.[/QUOTE] lower rate of fire = less recoil less muzzleflash it's there to make it easier to control not to prevent it from overheating

I actually forgot the hamr had the variable firerate, and kept thinking i had TURRIBLE fps issues in zombies when firing into large groups of enemies with my hamr/sldg hamr

While I'm shocked and surprised that there will be a new Call of Duty game in 2013... :v: I'm more amazed at the quote from Activision. [QUOTE]The Call of Duty franchise continues to set the bar for innovation...[/QUOTE] Don't get me wrong, but where has this cutting edge innovation been in CoD recently? Especially from IW. Indie titles have been doing a better job at that.

Most indie titles are shitty sidescrollers with 8 bit graphics, that's not innovative, it's just annoying.

You haven't been playing a great variety of indie titles, then..

Call of Duty.

This game. Fuck this game. Im about to make a video of axes just going RIGHT THROUGH people. In the past 2 days i've got AT LEAST 6 axes go through people in EVERY game i've played. Holy shit. I'm watching them in theater mode. Its so fucking bullshit.

[QUOTE=Demolitions2;39515239]This game. Fuck this game. Im about to make a video of axes just going RIGHT THROUGH people. In the past 2 days i've got AT LEAST 6 axes go through people in EVERY game i've played. Holy shit. I'm watching them in theater mode. Its so fucking bullshit.[/QUOTE] 95% chance it's lag compensation, which is the probably the worst thing in the game.