Infinity Ward creative strategist Rob Bowling has explained why Modern Warfare 3 can never be fully balanced, during an interview with NowGamer.
Killzone, Halo, Resistance, Gears, Battlefield, TimeSplitters, Counterstrike, Goldeneye, Uncharted Why is it that all these games have balance and you can't?
gears balance sucks. get good with the shotgun and the rest fo the guns are useless id be inclined to agree with halo, battlefield, timesplitters, CS, and goldeneye though the rest i either havent played or dont have enough experience to justify a valid opinion
everyone's bound to disagree with at least one he listed. (none any in particular, i mean)
No if you get good with cover/rifles LIKE YOUR SUPPOSED TO, then shotguns are useless. Simply dont charge full speed at your enemy if youre not prepared to be out shotgunned. You played enough to simply justify you suck ass at the game, thats all. Get good with a rifle and the shotgun is useless. Especially if you stay in cover.
I promised myself I wouldnt buy this game and I didnt. .. I bought it 20 minutes ago I'm sorry :( Edit: Kill confirmed is just too addicting to pass up
Perfect weapon balancing would be nrealy impossible in this game with all of the weapon combinations. With all the attachments and perks that can improve your weapons' performance, calculating out the way all of those would work on a totally blanaced playing field would prove difficult. Also, given that you do, after all, unlock weapons via levelling up, it would make sense that some weapons are better than others. Still though, perhaps if they worked on each title a little longer (here's to looking at you Activision and your 2 year development cycle for each CoD entry), it would be possible to find the best amount of buffing and nerfing to do to each weapon.
Balancing? In any of those games? Maybe just counterstrike. Killzone it takes half a clip from the ISA assualt rifle or Helghan Rifle to put someone down. The one thing Killzone has above all though, is the most gratifying and deadly sniper rifle I've ever used in a video game. Halo ... same thing. Minus the sniper rifle. A zillion bullets to kill someone. Battlefield : 2 shots for a 50 cal. to kill someone unless you get a headshot? A 50 cal will shoot your freaking arm off. etc. etc. All games have gun issues. Its impossible for video games to do otherwise without taking almost all the FUN .... FUN .... out of a GAME! I swear, people will complain about everything nowadays. COD has just as much weapon balance, and weapon balance "issues" as any other shooter. Shotguns and Sniper Rifles in most FPS games are 1 shot kills (unless ranged on a shotgun), other than that its not very realistic how many bullets or shots it takes to kill someone. But then again they are just video games meant to be fun, which everyone seems to forget. I find myself defending COD more and more now just because of the sheer one sided criticism it gets. Outside of not having a really dramatic graphical upgrade the game runs excellently. For every "issue" COD has, you could point out just as many and often more in every other game.
Halo!? Is the most unbalanced game I've ever played. Shotgun and invisiblity = 10 kill head start lol Rapid firing rocket launchers... swords that allow you to lunge at someone half the map away Yet you spawn with AR = cant kill anyone further than 5 feet away lol. ie disadvantaged. These power weapons would be fair if you earned them with 'in round' points like MGO, but they are just first come first served pick ups, whoever gets them gets easy kills, simple as. Unbalanced
JUST make all weapons to act like real ones! I see any difference - take a bullet in the head from RPG, regular pistol, rifle or a shootgun, in any way "your dead, period!" hate that I have to shoot in head 2 times in a HARDCORE mode with a pistol (and some other weapons) 2 bullets... wtf is that about? I call regular COD mode The Hardcore mode (you have 30 bullets and 29 of them you have to shoot from 1 cm in the head to get kill... yay).. and hardcore mode is incomplete unreal, real life simulation!
scratch battlefield 3 from that list. higher ranks gets way too much advantage over lower ranks. many times we got raped by USAS-12 with slug bullets!
I love BF3, but the USAS-12 with Frag rounds is beyond a joke. It is like shooting tank rounds.
but they are fixing that in the new update :)
very true. F2000 & Famas are just such awesome weapons, way better than anything you get at lower ranks :( only decent weapon you get at a lower rank for me is the M249. maybe also the SV98.
@frag Like they supposedly did in the last dozen updates? Sure. BF3 is poorly balanced. From the helicopters with unlimited flares that can hide a thousand feet in the air (with engineers feeding it health) to the ridiculous unlock structure (decent weapons, then crappy weapons, and then weapons of the gods at the highest ranks). Bad Company 2 was better balanced than BF3.
@ Silent Negotiator Thank you. I feel like I'm the only one on this site that is able to see the glaring issues that go unmentioned in the "game we shall not speak ill of" (BF3) that in any other game would be screamed from the mountain top. Especially if these unbalanced attrocities were "that other game" (COD).
I Agree!! BF3 Frag rounds need a nerfing. Interestingly enough, I finally gave them a try after unlocking them for the USAS12 this weekend.. and although I seem to get clown raped left and right by peopl using the USAS with Frags, yet I couldn't kill ANYONE with them unless they were right in my face!! I'm way better with assault rifles, carbines, or even pistols over shotguns loaded with any kind of Slug. I was thinking that an interesting way for DICE to address the Frag rounds in shotguns, would be to make them unlockable to Squad leaders of a team that has spent 3 minutes in the spawn base with the average team member recieving more deaths than kills.. basically the Frag rounds would be unlocked only if your being spawn raped.. than once the team captures one flag, the Frag rounds become unavailable again.
Killzone 2 was good, 3 had terrible balance. Resistance? 2 had the HVAP Wraith, making all other weapons pointless, and 3 had the insta-kill Atomizer. Battlefield can't be balanced, due to the vehicles. Uncharted has some bad perks, power weapons (T-Bolt snipers, anyone?) and kickbacks. I'm not saying CoD has perfect balance, but it's at least up there with the one's I just listed.
Resistance 3 mp is pretty fun, most guns are pretty equal in terms of taking damage. With the exception of like 2 guns.
Timesplitters and Goldeneye have balanced weapons...? WHAT?! half the fun is the mix of weapons that easy kills and ones that take skill since mw caters to multiple audiences I think there should be easy kill weapons for noobs and weapons that are a essentially a badge of honor for those who can master them. also weapon balance is kind of moot point when you can go 40-2 with killstreaks
"also weapon balance is kind of moot point when you can go 40-2 with killstreaks" BS. I see hundreds of cod players online almost daily man, and basically NO ONE (99%) goes 40-2...killstreaks or not.
Killzone 2 yes had balance Killzone 3 killed it with all the new things they added mainly the one were you can stay cloaked for almost forever when you level that class up. KZ2 it was just a sniper one KZ3 it had that 5round burst gun I believe.
BF2142 had amazing balance.
The only way to have perfect balance is if everyone is using the same gun. Those games you listed don't' have perfect balance.
Halo 3 everyone starts with the same exact weapons. No perks. No add ones. Perfect balance. The only way to get the upper hand is to work your way to better weapons and vehicles that are scattered around the map.
BR is overpowered in H3..but in a good way at least. The worst gun is the pistol, it's only useful in team swat.
. It's impossible to have perfect balance because perfection is not possible. BUT just because you can never get things perfectly balanced doesn't mean you just throw balance out the window. Balance isn't necessary in CoD anyways. It's an arcade game. It's meant for quick pick up and play to have fun. It's a casual game. CoD is not for competitiveness based off of skill. The skill that CoD cats refer to is the "skill" used to exploit the casual game's unbalances that shouldn't exist, but do due to lack of attention to detail. I've had CoD players tell me that Quickscoping requires skill, LOL.
None of those game you mentioned have gun balance. You kids are whack on this site. LMAO... to even mention Killzone and Resistance.. one of those games isn't even being made anymore. L O L These anti COD fanboys are becoming one of the most sickening bunch on the internet. Disgusting filth.
Jeseth, To me it looks like your confused. They said balance not realism. How many bullets it takes is not really about balance if all the guns take near the same amount then its tech even. The .50 cal sniper in BF3 is a perfect example of balance if it 1 shotted no matter where the shot all you would be playing against is snipers how aim at your legs and chest when really it should be headshots. If your going to sit in your spawn 200meters away you should not be given a 1 shot weapon that screams imbalance. I bring up the sniper cuz Im currently playing BF and if my rifle was 1 shot i would get 30-40+ kills agame.
With the amount of guns they have it is def a difficult task, Uncharted right now is having problems with weapon balance, asfter patch 1.03 everyone was frustrated with the fal and then 1.04 they nerfed the fal and now the g-mal is becoming a concern in the community, Uncharted 2 never had this problem because it had less guns. Uncharted only has 4 primary weapons to choose from, call of duty has dozens if not more. SO the task of finding a balance is a big ask. Gears is a different kettle of fish, you get four weapons and out of those there are only 2-3 to choose from each weapon type which hardly isnt as complicated as CoD. I don't play CoD but having been in a community facing these issues I could only imagine how complicated it would be for a content rich game like CoD
Killzone was never that balanced online. Invisible snipers would camp in corridors and use their rifles like shotguns. Battlefield is no where near balanced either. Everyone uses the famas. Just like in black ops. No game has a truly balanced set of guns, if they were all perfectly balanced, then theyd all be exactly the same. I dont think its a huge issue, despite the slight imbalances all the guns can be effective. Its just bad players, not bad guns.
It is possible. Just never on a Call of Duty game with an inferior, out of date engine.
What does the engine have to do with balance? People say CoD4 had perfect balance, and that uses the same engine. I don't know what you guys are on about, because MW3 is very balanced.
Because you sound like you're talking about the game in general and not the guns I disagree completely. COD4 was balanced because it had 3 killstreaks that everyone got and perks that didn't have pro versions that added a bunch to your character. In mw3 it takes hours to get some pro versions while minutes to get others too. Machine pistols are just as good as submachine guns so there's no point in pistols and people use the FMG9 as their primary half the time. How is that balanced? COD4 didn't have deathstreaks or killstreaks like predators that get free kills while big kill streaks get shot down within seconds. I didn't know balance was rewarding lesser killstreaks with more kills. There is no point in using over 9 killstreaks when they get shot down while having free kills with predators. Same with getting stealth bombers that rip through everything and you don't need a streak while the normal airstrikes won't get a kill if it's used if a building's close by. I'm not saying they should take things out but they should actually BALANCE the game and it sounds like Treyarch is listening with the things they're saying so that's a glimmer of hope for Black Ops 2. Seriously if MW3 is so balanced play Search and Destroy without dead silence and do consistently good...