[QUOTE=trotskygrad;32623473]CoD thread bros man... we should like have a "not rate dumb" agreement so we can see what randoms come through and rate us dumb.
IIRC it had a slower RoF than the M4 Carbine (yes I know it's a M4A1, bla bla bla), and more recoil, yet some people just liked the looks (including me)
although AK will always be my fav.[/QUOTE]
Will mostly be random dumbs or haters from other regions of the forums with the dumbs.
In mw1, I HATED the M4. Simply hated everything about it.
Its damage, its sound, its iron sights, its looks mostly above everything.
You slap a red dot or an acog to it, it looks even worse. Like a bunch of pieces of steel taped to it and then legos for the rails. The rails being the part that makes it look the worst, on the sides and so on.
Then the sound that looks like... I don't know what. Hell, it sounds like the Heavy from TF2 imitating his minigun with the RATATATATATATA sound. I just... HATED IT.
The MW2 came along with a MUCH NICER model to it. Looking more rugged and durable instead of a weapon out of the prototype trench warfare from many years ago, an all new firing sound for the MP part that kinda sounds like it will shoot through titanium and keep going through a bunch of heads and some much better, wider sights.
I just didn't use the G36 on MW1 because its sights were a bit too thight and there was always the AK as a superior choice.
[editline]4th October 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=trotskygrad;32623676]all the regulars
(me, you, dass, Zillamaster, Grim Joker, VMonkey, etc.) should all have an agreement not to rate each other dumb so we can see how much hate we attract from other users.[/QUOTE]
I thought I was the only one.
My eyes shine when the news node or anywhere else gets a CoD based thread. It will soon be filled with people hating the game with the most stupid of facts.
Theres one on the news node right now!
[QUOTE=dass;32623943]Will mostly be random dumbs or haters from other regions of the forums with the dumbs.
In mw1, I HATED the M4. Simply hated everything about it.
Its damage, its sound, its iron sights, its looks mostly above everything.
You slap a red dot or an acog to it, it looks even worse. Like a bunch of pieces of steel taped to it and then legos for the rails. The rails being the part that makes it look the worst, on the sides and so on.
Then the sound that looks like... I don't know what. Hell, it sounds like the Heavy from TF2 imitating his minigun with the RATATATATATATA sound. I just... HATED IT.
The MW2 came along with a MUCH NICER model to it. Looking more rugged and durable instead of a weapon out of the prototype trench warfare from many years ago, an all new firing sound for the MP part that kinda sounds like it will shoot through titanium and keep going through a bunch of heads and some much better, wider sights.
I just didn't use the G36 on MW1 because its sights were a bit too thight and there was always the AK as a superior choice.[/QUOTE]
Pssh MW2 moved in general to the entire WIDE OPEN BUIS look, overly so IMO in Black Ops (remember that post about me showing how 3 guns were like the exact same?)
yeah it looked like shit but oh well, it had better stats.
I used to use the M16 with irons and M9, Bandolier, Stopping power, and deep impact while on marines and AK with same kit on OPFOR to troll...
so I'm used to the irons.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;32623804]Usually people trying to incite a reaction. But seriously, it's a 16x16 image, spegin' over that is pretty stupid.[/QUOTE]
Yeah but the thing is people tend to take notice to positive ones and maybe disagree being the only negative they pay attention to, it's kinda stupid i mean what's the point in ratings at all if people just completely ignore them.
[QUOTE=trotskygrad;32623816]lol, friends sister said if she brought any games to university she would have failed[/QUOTE]
Wat :v: I know I could easily procrastinate that much (I have about 4 games that I know I haven't finished with me), but god damn. That's just bad.
[QUOTE=trotskygrad;32623975]Pssh MW2 moved in general to the entire WIDE OPEN BUIS look, overly so IMO in Black Ops (remember that post about me showing how 3 guns were like the exact same?)
yeah it looked like shit but oh well, it had better stats.
I used to use the M16 with irons and M9, Bandolier, Stopping power, and deep impact while on marines and AK with same kit on OPFOR to troll...
so I'm used to the irons.[/QUOTE]
BO was kind of bad on the sight system.
Lots of guns had the same exact sights, which is a bit... Yeah...
You're right, it is a bit yeah, i kind of thought it was a bit no but you know.
[QUOTE=Viorotica;32624630]You're right, it is a bit yeah, i kind of thought it was a bit no but you know.[/QUOTE]
No, I don't know. Enlighten me.
NO WAIT! Draw me a pretty picture of Soap :v:
[QUOTE=Tinter;32623238]Anybody know why Black Ops keep popping up with "Downloading game settings"? It's really annoying.[/QUOTE]
Anybody?
[QUOTE=Tinter;32625064]Anybody?[/QUOTE]taking settings from the cloud probably
Good god, why is it that people ask for new weapons when the game takes place right after mw2?
It makes no sense at all!
And why are the haters complete ignorants who always pull the DLC card even if we don't actually really need it and its not a monthly release thing anymore? It makes them look incredibly dumb.
[QUOTE=dass;32624773]No, I don't know. Enlighten me.
NO WAIT! Draw me a pretty picture of Soap :v:[/QUOTE]
Here's some really shit soap with the same message.
[img]http://filesmelt.com/dl/soap-wut.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=dass;32625644]Good god, why is it that people ask for new weapons when the game takes place right after mw2?
It makes no sense at all![/QUOTE]
remember halo 2?
lol... "if they had PDWs why didn't we see them in the first game11!!!111"
[QUOTE=Viorotica;32625649]Here's some really shit soap with the same message.
[img]http://filesmelt.com/dl/soap-wut.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
Bonus points if you put that soap on Soap's face.
[editline]4th October 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=trotskygrad;32625814]remember halo 2?
lol... "if they had PDWs why didn't we see them in the first game11!!!111"[/QUOTE]
No. Never really followed that game's comunity. Don't know why. Probably because I expect to see a great bucket of rage from each person.
Huh, Halo kinda looks like CoD.
Each release has the same story, a little better engines (with some exceptions ofc) and the same crap + a little more each time one is released.
Tell me if I'm wrong.
[QUOTE=dass;32625827]Bonus points if you put that soap on Soap's face.
[editline]4th October 2011[/editline]
No.
Huh, Halo kinda looks like CoD.
Each release has the same story, a little better engines (with some exceptions ofc) and the same crap + a little more each time one is released.
Tell me if I'm wrong.[/QUOTE]
bonus points if you make it play price's voice saying his disparaging line about soap's name
[editline]4th October 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=hexpunK;32624108]Wat :v: I know I could easily procrastinate that much (I have about 4 games that I know I haven't finished with me), but god damn. That's just bad.[/QUOTE]
sim city 4 to be precise.
[img]http://filesmelt.com/dl/soap-wut-mac.jpg[/img]
Worst face map i've done.
[QUOTE=Viorotica;32625937][img]http://filesmelt.com/dl/soap-wut-mac.jpg[/img]
Worst face map i've done.[/QUOTE]
Dat fucking mohawk...
[QUOTE=Dummkopfs!;32625229]taking settings from the cloud probably[/QUOTE]
Yeah but the thing is it finishes and then it comes back after a few seconds.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;32621673]gaming crusader bullshit[/QUOTE]
I'm not defending it or justifying it. I would love it if it were free, or cheaper than fifty dollars at least. I'm pointing out how the guy in that video is wrong.
He is correct in that we are losing content in favor for DLC, but that isn't the only thing he said. It's stupid of you to pretend that he did. He's acting like you ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO BUY ALL THE DLC AND THAT MAKES IT A ONE HUNDRED AND TEN DOLLAR GAME AHHHHHHHHHH even though you can just play the sixty dollar game fine.
Well considering they confirmed all the DLC in the first year would equate to sixty dollars, if we're talking about pure money, yes, you will get your fifty dollars worth, and then some. I'm assuming you're talking about your opinion of it's value though, which can't really be argued, since it's an opinion. I agree that it's shitty that devs are taking stuff that was on-disk and putting it out as DLC, but I don't recall past Call of Duty games doing that, although I may be wrong. If you don't think it's worth your money, then don't buy it.
Actually, by not giving Activision your money, that is exactly how you stop it. You're voting with your dollar. How do you propose to stop it otherwise? By making angry youtube videos? Yes, those get so much done. If you don't think the service is worth your money, then don't buy it. It's an optional service, for fucks sake. I'm buying it because it is something that genuinely appeals to me. I plan on buying the DLC, and thus, I will just buy a year and get the DLC for ten dollars off. Saying 'we used to get for free' in games is a stupid argument. Hey, remember when Gas was a dollar a gallon? Hey, remember when a candy bar was ten cents? Part of the reason we're having to pay for shit is inflation. Money isn't worth as much as it was before. Another reason is, hey, maybe the game devs want money! Activision is a really wealthy company, sure, but the actual developers need to put food on the table. Do you really think the developers of Call of Duty are rolling in money? Do you really think they're seeing all of the profit off of this game? The only thing they can do to keep making profit is either make a new game or release DLC. Since people always bitch about how often they release games, they make DLC. This isn't some kind of pyramid scheme to make all of America poor. Sure, Activision is probably genuinely greedy and wants money, but don't slap the 'greed' tag on everyone involved in the process.
Holy fuck, why do you keep comparing the price tag of everything to everything else. Value is in the eye of the beholder. I was never much of a fan of the Metal Gear Solid series, so buying the entire collection for sixty dollars still isn't a good deal for me, because I don't find the games fun. That's like saying "WHY BUY AN 80 DOLLAR GAME WHEN THAT COULD GET YOU LIKE EIGHTY CANDY BARS INSTEAD". If you don't think something is worth eighty dollars, don't spend eighty dollars on it. I think Starbucks Coffee is good, but I think the price is a little steep, so I don't go there! See how that works? I don't know why you think the argument of 'don't buy it' is infuriating, seeing as how that's exactly what you should do. Do you know how much download codes go for online? After Halo: Reach came out, someone bought the 80 dollar edition of the game and sold a download code for thirty dollars. Download codes go for a fuckload online, so if you want to talk about re-sale value, if you bought the 80 dollar edition of the game you could probably make all your money back in download codes alone.
L.A. Noire is a 20-25 hour single player game with no multiplayer tacked on. There are also a bunch of secrets, and a ton of answers you probably didn't get on your first playthrough to keep you playing. Months later I've started yet another new playthrough to try and get everything. Bioshock had no multiplayer and had tons of re-play value, and that's not that old of a game. Hell, people still play that game today and enjoy it. Stop going off on your 'gaming crusader' tirade, there are perfectly fine games still being released. People like you infuriate me because instead of just playing and enjoying games you like and acknowledging that other people like other games ,and that corporations have had unsavory business practices since they were created, you fly off the handle and say we need to stand up for our rights. Uh, okay, exercise your rights by not buying the game! See? You still have that right, and you can still use it! Hooray!
Actually not buying games is going to stop it. Oh, you want to play a game? Okay well I guess you have to decide between buying a game and giving a company money, or finding something else to do and not giving the company money. I want the DLC, but you seem to be keep on calling me stupid and insisting that I am responsible for people's rights being violating (which is a fucking retarded argument. Wow you don't think the game is worth 60 dollars OMG OUR RIGHTS ARE BEING TAKEN AWAY) despite the fact that I just enjoy the DLC they put out and think it's worth the money.
Wow citing a game that had a flawed lobby system as TAKING AWAY YOUR RIGHTS TO PLAY. Hey what about Modern Warfare 2? Hey what about Black Ops? Neither of those would put you in a lobby with DLC if you didn't have the DLC. In fact I didn't buy a single piece of DLC for Black Ops except for the very first map pack, and I still have fun with the game! I actually deleted the first map pack off my harddrive for space, and I play without it, and still have fun! You don't need to buy the DLC to have fun. Nobody is making you buy the DLC, so stop acting like they are.
Timesplitters was fun, but would you really pay 60 dollars for it if the exact same game was released today? It's a fun game great but so is tic-tac-toe or connect four. Chess and Checkers are pretty fun too. I was saying it doesn't really stand up to today's standard of gaming and that's a fact. If it were released as it is today, people would bitch about how it isn't worth the price tag, and how it feels like an old game.
Don't say you have to buy the DLC to have fun, that's a dumb thing to say. DLC in Call of Duty is just maps. Wow you're right I rely on scenery to have fun in a shooter. I like how you're acting like all the DLC is going to be on the disk even though the game isn't even out yet. How about you wait until the game is released before shouting about how all of the DLC is on the disk?
Sorry but can you stop with the story battle shit.
Let it go Grim... They will NEVER get it... They think its like WoW or something...
Funny thing, people can pay 200 euros or more for its expansions and then keep wasting money on the subscription and take it in the ass without questioning anything.
Edit: I just saw some BF3 beta footage. Good GOD, saying its a BC2 clone isn't enough. Basically, the only new stuff thats in the game (which I've yet to see) is jets. Else, is just as if it was a reskin really.
So, if not alot changes from beta to full release (doubt it), BF3 is another CoD-like case. Smells like the BF3 fanboys are gonna eat crow...
[QUOTE=dass;32626990]Let it go Grim... They will NEVER get it... They think its like WoW or something...
Funny thing, people can pay 200 euros or more for its expansions and then keep wasting money on the subscription and take it in the ass without questioning anything.[/QUOTE]
Yeah man, calling people who don't want to buy DLC "they" like we are some hivemind is such a great idea! Why don't I just call all Mexicans lazy? Oh wait, political correctness. We are all entitled to opinion on things, and in mine the way publishers and developers are behaving with their games in recent years is getting worse. Yes, it is an industry, yes they need to make money. But they are making it at our expense, people are just lapping that shit up though, with no real thought into what they are buying most times.
There is nothing to "get", you either like being rammed by companies for all the money they think you will give up, or you don't, and have other thoughts. Again, you seem like the kind of person they target with the DLC, you might like it, but not everybody is happy with this system. But what does that matter right? You're getting your cut content back for a pricetag that it isn't worthy of, so everything is fine!
This is nothing like WoW, at least the subscription for WoW gets you a standard MMO, which seems to receive constant, and sometimes questionable content updates for new content. I'm not exactly an expert on WoW though as that shit gets expensive. At least that money goes into keeping the servers online, CoD worked fine without a (optional) subscription, so this would just be going straight into someones pocket (not the devs knowing Activision).
And while I might have over-reacted to that first post Grim Joker (and I admit, I do), seeing someone so willingly pay out the cost of fuel for a small car, the cost of small, usually really fun indie games, etc, on 5 maps for a single game that they will probably drop when the sequel launches next year just seems so wrong. Large developers seem to have lost the passion to provide games today, now they seem to see of them as "services".
But whatever, I'm taking the dass route here;
You will never get it...but, that's just like, your opinion man.
Just so you're sure, this means I'm dropping the argument because we're just going to be like brick walls to each other.
To those going back and forth with the DLC rage, if you don't get the DLC then more often then not Treyarch/Activision slams the maps into lobbies where you have no choice other than your single 'vote to skip' to not play the map. I remember in World at War, if you didn't have the map packs then 9/10 times I got put into lobbies with map pack maps and got kicked out every fucking time for not having them.
[QUOTE=Wake;32627345]To those going back and forth with the DLC rage, if you don't get the DLC then more often then not Treyarch/Activision slams the maps into lobbies where you have no choice other than your single 'vote to skip' to not play the map. I remember in World at War, if you didn't have the map packs then 9/10 times I got put into lobbies with map pack maps and got kicked out every fucking time for not having them.[/QUOTE]
World at War and Call of Duty 4 were the last games to have that happening. They removed it in MW2 and Black Ops, and will probably still have it removed in MW3.
[QUOTE=Grim Joker;32627460]World at War and Call of Duty 4 were the last games to have that happening. They removed it in MW2 and Black Ops, and will probably still have it removed in MW3.[/QUOTE]
I must have awful luck or something, but I've managed to end up getting switched to map pack maps in MW2, though this might have been shortly after they launched them. People never voteskip anything from experience.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;32627512]I must have awful luck or something, but I've managed to end up getting switched to map pack maps in MW2, though this might have been shortly after they launched them. People never voteskip anything from experience.[/QUOTE]
That's odd. Must have been before the implemented the change then. My point is, if you don't buy the DLC, you'll be fine. You'll be able to play the game and have fun with it still, the only thing you'll be missing out on is some maps and some bonus spec ops missions, from my understanding.
Itt: We argue about something that doesn't affect a damn thing, but it makes us look cool because we type huge-ass paragraphs about it.
You know just not buying the DLC is probably the best idea, if enough people just not buy it they'll have to change their business practices to get sales.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;32627258]Yeah man, calling people who don't want to buy DLC "they" like we are some hivemind is such a great idea! Why don't I just call all Mexicans lazy? Oh wait, political correctness. We are all entitled to opinion on things, and in mine the way publishers and developers are behaving with their games in recent years is getting worse. Yes, it is an industry, yes they need to make money. But they are making it at our expense, people are just lapping that shit up though, with no real thought into what they are buying most times.
There is nothing to "get", you either like being rammed by companies for all the money they think you will give up, or you don't, and have other thoughts. Again, you seem like the kind of person they target with the DLC, you might like it, but not everybody is happy with this system. But what does that matter right? You're getting your cut content back for a pricetag that it isn't worthy of, so everything is fine!
This is nothing like WoW, at least the subscription for WoW gets you a standard MMO, which seems to receive constant, and sometimes questionable content updates for new content. I'm not exactly an expert on WoW though as that shit gets expensive. At least that money goes into keeping the servers online, CoD worked fine without a (optional) subscription, so this would just be going straight into someones pocket (not the devs knowing Activision).
And while I might have over-reacted to that first post Grim Joker (and I admit, I do), seeing someone so willingly pay out the cost of fuel for a small car, the cost of small, usually really fun indie games, etc, on 5 maps for a single game that they will probably drop when the sequel launches next year just seems so wrong. Large developers seem to have lost the passion to provide games today, now they seem to see of them as "services".
But whatever, I'm taking the dass route here;
You will never get it...but, that's just like, your opinion man.
Just so you're sure, this means I'm dropping the argument because we're just going to be like brick walls to each other.[/QUOTE]
I have no idea where you even got that idea, but that just made you look bad and mad...
Yes, those are your opinions and your entitled to it, but, you are wrong.
If you really pay that attention to DLC, I suggest you never buy a car, as they are "cutting back on the content for a smaller pricetag that it isn't worthy". You might say this is a bad comparison, but it actually fits well. You don't need DLC/leather seats, you don't buy them. There. A couple of maps extra isn't gonna make any difference.
Its that easy. But, in your mind, someone gives you a gun, and you either shoot yourself with it or someone else, instead of anything else. Its what you people (lol hive mind, or maybe you people as in the people who hate cod with a passion) make it seem.
Good thing your dropping it, because you have no grounds.
[editline]4th October 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Lucinice;32627821]You know just not buying the DLC is probably the best idea, if enough people just not buy it they'll have to change their business practices to get sales.[/QUOTE]That will never happen, but it is a good idea if you don't feel like paying more then 60 dollars, then don't.
I don't understand the issue behind getting this.
god this is like worse than the BF3 thread
[QUOTE=dass;32626990]Let it go Grim... They will NEVER get it... They think its like WoW or something...
Funny thing, people can pay 200 euros or more for its expansions and then keep wasting money on the subscription and take it in the ass without questioning anything.
Edit: I just saw some BF3 beta footage. Good GOD, saying its a BC2 clone isn't enough. Basically, the only new stuff thats in the game (which I've yet to see) is jets. Else, is just as if it was a reskin really.
So, if not alot changes from beta to full release (doubt it), BF3 is another CoD-like case. Smells like the BF3 fanboys are gonna eat crow...[/QUOTE]
not really, prone, health bars, redone attachment system, jets, increased player count and (hopefully) better conquest and larger maps, fucking stupid vehicle regen, deeper vehicle unlocks, bla bla bla.
I might not agree with all the changes, and BF3 is definitely not the next BF2, but it's not a BC2 clone.
anyways
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;32627751]Itt: We argue about something that doesn't affect a damn thing, but it makes us look cool because we type huge-ass paragraphs about it.[/QUOTE]
nuff said
[QUOTE=dass;32627993]Yes, those are your opinions and your entitled to it, but, you are wrong[/QUOTE]
News just in: opinions can be factually wrong if you don't agree with them.
You really seem to struggle with arguments going by some of the posts in other CoD threads (News Node shit), I have plenty of grounds to stand on for my argument, but a lot of it involves having opinions that can be compared to mine in the first place.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
