Squilookle said:
I don't really 'get' the whole overpowered weapon making you want to stop playing thing. It just made victory more sweet when you triumphed over something, and in singleplayer using something overpowered was just fun, and usually very limited too. I mean, that's the entire point of Golden Gun matches!
The best online games are more along the lines of a Gentleman's Duel, only they're not very gentle.
Provided the maps are laid out well enough to be perfectly balanced for both team and the weapons are balanced enough for no real gun to have no real advantage over any other gun (aside from the skill of the player using them) and it comes down to nothing but skill over who wins.
This is why football and tennis and such are such well structured games.
Symmetrical playing fields, equal tools for both sides, may the best man win.
This is why I find myself playing less and less online games nowadays and heading more towards well built singleplayer experiences, where narrative, subtext, plot and characterization are the main focus rather than balance (note: I'm not saying that balance is non-essential to a well made singleplayer experience.)
To me, Call of Duty's finest multiplayer was United Offensive. No perks, no killstreak rewards, no limitations on which weapon you use, just near enough a test of skill. Situational awareness, aim, flow of movement throughout the map, etc.
Both sides being equal and then winning makes victory sweet, one side having an advantage yet still losing is simply poor form. How can there be any satisfaction in winning or losing when the odds are stacked in a game of skill?