Well there's this, which ties into one of the big complaints on here.
...
Haha. The clearest thing that comic shows is that moral dispute with someone unconcerned with the morality of the action in question is fruitless.
One game I've been disappointed with in many ways is MW2. Best-selling game in history, second-biggest grossing media item in history...
Yet they dropped the ball in so many ways. Their base programming is set to enable
all kinds of amazing things, but they limited the options tremedously in all forms of multiplayer (not just online) and prevented all modding. I'd love to see them actually make use of all of the weapon options and effects they programmed. A little bit more care and variety in the attachments would give the game so much more credibility and play value.
Questions for the programmers that seem to come up naturally after a few hours with the game:
So your programming includes all of the basic elements for multiple varieties and models of several guns, and you even include some of them in the single-player missions. Why not use what you've programmed and include them all in mainstream play?
So this weapon comes with certain built-in "attachments", why not reflect that in "Create A Class"?
So you programmed a real laser designator system including spectral effects on smoke, ambients and particulates. Why not utilize that with projection red dot sights?
So you included a few near-realistic varieties of certain attachments to reflect the weapons' different actual available equipment, why not program them properly to match the real thing?
I think all of these decisions were made to create "balanced competitive gameplay", but standardizing everything has really just left the gameplay bland. Why do all of the same attachments come on all of the weapons in a class when some weapons have very profound effective and ineffective possibilities?
It just seems rushed and hackneyed. They could have done so much better...
I would like to see a very complex class creation system used with the current unlocking system. It would require dedicated testing and true balancing; it would really require a huge amount of work for the programmers. Players would build their class up to a certain limited point value.
For instance: An AUG HBAR is a powerful, accurate weapon, and with a grip, scope, and heartbeat sensor (each a high-value attachment) you could afford almost nothing else -low mobility, no camo, and likely just a pistol for a sidearm.
An M4 rifle is decently accurate, with low damage output and low penetration. Let's say you put a silencer and fullmetal jacket on it. FMJ costs a little extra on this weapon, whereas it would have cost almost nothing on the AUG (which has high penetration already). However, you have only two attachments and a much weaker weapon. You have enough left over to nab a powerful AA-12 shotgun, camo, and much higher mobility.
A system like this would require real work and balance, not like the "half-assed" one they have now.
Poll
3 (6.1%)
Author
Topic: My problem with modern games. (Read 127057 times)