Sniping is officially WORTHLESS in Black Ops

[smeghead25]

Well, time to learn patience then. Like a sniper.

Exactly. I saw all this complaining coming from miles away when they mentioned it. But you know what, if you want to snipe with cheap quickscoping enabled, then go play another CoD or Halo.

Look at it this way: Sniper's are powerful weapons compared to assault rifles, not to mention more cumbersome. Therefore it would be totally unrealistic and unfair for people to be able to run around with a sniper in their hands and shoot people as though it was an overpowered assault rifle. If you want to run around the map in plain view and shoot people. that's what shotguns and assault rifles are for. If you want to sneakily hide in corners and snipe people, that's what sniper's are for.

And FYI, I don't mean camping. You pick a spot, snipe, move on to another spot. You know what you're SUPPOSED to use when moving to another spot? You're secondary weapon, such as a pistol. That's called balancing folks. Snipers can rack up those kills, but if they want to play fair without camping, they have to move and become vulnerable with only a pistol as a backup.

 

[JaredXE]

What a whiny ***** in that video. The whole role of a sniper is LONG RANGE SUPPORT. You don't "play aggressive" with a rifle at close range like a cheap-assed punk. Sniping should be about skill and lining up the right shot.

I love how quickscoping is a legit strategy, but camping (like a sniper actually does) is noobish and *****-assed.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

here is my opinion: if your using a sniper and shooting at targets that could be hit with any other weapon, you are doing it fucking wrong. I dont care how "unrealistic" the game is supposed to be, using any sniper class weapon the way the narrator in the video attempts to do is just not possible.

It's not possible to be able to aim an assault rifle as fast you can in a video game either. A bullet should go where you aim it.

No other game ever has done this kind of bullshit before. In every other shooter ever, the bullet goes where you aim (unless wind and gravity play a factor in the game).

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

If Team Fortress 2 added another set of boxing gloves that fire fireballs for the heavy, and at first they could hurt people at extremely long ranges, even when they were designed for short-range use. VALVe than adds a minor update that gives the weapon a slight randomizer the longer the range is. Would you continue trying to use it at long range complaining that it's broken? You might not have played TF2 so don't understand the analogy. But what I'm trying to get out is that the roles of the sniper have changed, consider it a totally different weapon, and that they removed the old sniper.

That is similar in a way but way different as well. Fireballs in a shooter is kind of a special case scenario. Why even have a randomizer at longer range? Why not have the fireball die out after traveling so far?

 

[Deguasser]

Lol most people if they do what Activision plan by the end of the year, which is make you pay to play online, then they're going to lose a lot of people because most of the 14 year olds and younger won't be able to get their parents to pay for it.

 

[GRoXERs]

IMO, if you want to quick-scope, use one of the semi-auto assault rifles thoughtfully provided for that purpose. I can't count the number of times I've popped around a corner and used the M14 or FAL with stopping power to one-shot-head-shot moronic no-scopers who are rushing me. That, my friends, takes actual SKILL, as opposed to "herp derp LT+RT=autoaim+*bang*" Honestly, I've never seen a quickscoper get a k/d much over 1 when actually playing with people at their skill level, so I don't really see why you people are defending it this strenuously. It's not cheap, because cheap implies some sort of advantage conferred; instead, it's just annoying, because people don't even really have to bother aiming at you to kill you.

 

[Polaris19]

When you scope in and shoot with a sniper rifle, the bullet will not go where you are aiming unless you WAIT 2 to 3 seconds to shoot after you scope in.


I don't understand why people support a game where one of the developers completely breaks a legitimate play style in a game just because he's a noob.

"Quickscoping is a cheap way to play. We?re specifically going to gimp Quickscoping, sorry. Play straight-up!" - Josh Olin

1) The correct term is NERF not gimp
2) Quickscoping is only cheap AT TIMES because of the poorly coded aim assist
3) Even with the poorly coded aim assist, quickscoping wasn't even overpowered, ARing and SMGing would beat quickscoping most of the time.
4) Don't be lazy (and break a play style); properly code aim assist but I guess that's too hard

The most important thing for competitive online gaming is balance among classes and play styles. Why buy and play a game where the developer purposefully makes the game unbalanced?

Go hold a real sniper rifle sometime. You'll understand that it could be much worse in some situations. People seem to think a real sniper s someone who goes around and fires a no scope shot at point blank.

No.

Snipers are specialists. They hang far back from the actual fighting because their weapon is designed SPECIFICALLY for long distance kills. IT is not a weapon you take into the heat of a firefight. You hang back from the firefight and snipe enemies, or provide counter-sniping to combat an enemy sniper.

Sniper rifles are not SMGs, shotguns, or assault rifles, and they shouldn't be used as such. I think it's a smart move. Maybe now snipers will actual play like they should, instead of quickscoping me from pointblank after I hose him with my AK...

 

[b3nn3tt]

So it's not actually worthless, it's just going to be more realistic? I'm pretty sure that in real life snipers don't go around quickscoping

In real life. Tell me who wants their games to be just like real life? Isn't the whole point in gaming to be able to do and experience things unrealistic? If Assassins Creed 2 were realistic Ezios ass would not be able to pull himself up with a fingertip of ledge and would have fallen and died game over. Reality needs to stand far clear from games as long as im concerned.

I just meant realistic in terms of what sniper rifles are actually for. In the same sense that being able to pick people off at distance with a pistol is unrealistic, being able to use a sniper rifle as a close-range weapon is bordering on the ridiculous

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

What a whiny ***** in that video. The whole role of a sniper is LONG RANGE SUPPORT. You don't "play aggressive" with a rifle at close range like a cheap-assed punk. Sniping should be about skill and lining up the right shot.

I love how quickscoping is a legit strategy, but camping (like a sniper actually does) is noobish and *****-assed.

Why can't you play aggressive as a sniper in an unrealistic shooter? An assault rifle can take out a sniper sniping at long range when you would require a counter sniper in real life to do that. Therefore, why can't a sniper be able to take out an AR player at close range on occasion when an AR can take out a long range sniper?

 

[smeghead25]

It's called Changing a game mechanic.

If you enjoy MW2, you can go ahead and play it, I'm sure they'll still be plenty of servers about. If Black Op's removed quick-scoping, it's trying to get customers from a slightly different market, and there's nothing wrong with that.

Why change a game mechanic to make it luck-based instead of skill-based? I'll take skill-based over luck-based any day. If I get killed by someone, I would at least like them to be aiming at me. I hate MW2 and barely played it, I like balance in my online multiplayer games. If a game fails on accomplishing that, then I don't play it. I want it to be my skill vs someone else's skill; I don't want to get killed because the enemy was lucky or get killed because the enemy was using something overpowered.

Luck based? Dude, you try running up to a guy, aiming through the scope, and shooting him in the head while he's moving in real life. I say 9 times out of 10 you'll be pointing anywhere but the head and have to adjust your aim because it's a large, heavy, cumbersome weapon. And it'll take more than 2-3 seconds to aim. And after he's shot you with his pistol, you'll be wishing you'd been using an assault rifle, like you are supposed to in close combat.

 

[LadyRhian]

It's called Changing a game mechanic.

If you enjoy MW2, you can go ahead and play it, I'm sure they'll still be plenty of servers about. If Black Op's removed quick-scoping, it's trying to get customers from a slightly different market, and there's nothing wrong with that.

Why change a game mechanic to make it luck-based instead of skill-based? I'll take skill-based over luck-based any day. If I get killed by someone, I would at least like them to be aiming at me. I hate MW2 and barely played it, I like balance in my online multiplayer games. If a game fails on accomplishing that, then I don't play it. I want it to be my skill vs someone else's skill; I don't want to get killed because the enemy was lucky or get killed because the enemy was using something overpowered.

Actually, they are fixing something that was unbalanced. The sniper is meant to be a "far away from the battlefield" killer. Giving them the power to one-shot kill you from far away *and* close up with the same gun is unbalanced. So they are actually bringing the sniper rifle back into balance, not "unbalancing" the game. Your choice to play a sniper with a sniper rifle is a role. You choose to play a guy with a shotgun, that's a role, too. If they changed it so that the shotgun could one-hit kill you from halfway across a large map, that would be unbalanced. This is just changing stuff so that if you choose to play a sniper and use a sniper rifle, you can't act like a guy with a shotgun and get the same results- like it or not, that's balanced just fine.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Go hold a real sniper rifle sometime. You'll understand that it could be much worse in some situations. People seem to think a real sniper s someone who goes around and fires a no scope shot at point blank.

Go hold an assault rifle in real life and see if you can aim at a moving target at medium range like you can in a game.

 

[ForensicYOYO]

So it's not actually worthless, it's just going to be more realistic? I'm pretty sure that in real life snipers don't go around quickscoping

In real life. Tell me who wants their games to be just like real life? Isn't the whole point in gaming to be able to do and experience things unrealistic? If Assassins Creed 2 were realistic Ezios ass would not be able to pull himself up with a fingertip of ledge and would have fallen and died game over. Reality needs to stand far clear from games as long as im concerned.

I just meant realistic in terms of what sniper rifles are actually for. In the same sense that being able to pick people off at distance with a pistol is unrealistic, being able to use a sniper rifle as a close-range weapon is bordering on the ridiculous

O. Well I guess that makes sense. sorry for un needed rant.

 

[Dark2003]

It seems perfectly reasonable too me, heavy gun with maximum power used for long range shooting, being cheaply used for close quarters combat, sound like they fixed the game to me

 

[Fanta Grape]

Team Fortress 2. Think about it.

Don't bugger up the game and make it all luck based. Just make the scoping slower. Simple

 

[Lyri]

When you scope in and shoot with a sniper rifle, the bullet will not go where you are aiming unless you WAIT 2 to 3 seconds to shoot after you scope in.


I don't understand why people support a game where one of the developers completely breaks a legitimate play style in a game just because he's a noob.

"Quickscoping is a cheap way to play. We?re specifically going to gimp Quickscoping, sorry. Play straight-up!" - Josh Olin

1) The correct term is NERF not gimp
2) Quickscoping is only cheap AT TIMES because of the poorly coded aim assist
3) Even with the poorly coded aim assist, quickscoping wasn't even overpowered, ARing and SMGing would beat quickscoping most of the time.
4) Don't be lazy (and break a play style); properly code aim assist but I guess that's too hard

The most important thing for competitive online gaming is balance among classes and play styles. Why buy and play a game where the developer purposefully makes the game unbalanced?

Sorry but this is just a worthless post.

"Quickscoping is a cheap way to play. We?re specifically going to gimp Quickscoping, sorry. Play straight-up!" - Josh Olin
1) The correct term is NERF not gimp

That's nitpicking right there, pathetic opening.

2) Quickscoping is only cheap AT TIMES because of the poorly coded aim assist

It's cheap anyway, you shouldn't be using a sniper like that.Ever.
It's a gun designed to kill people from range in one or two shots, I'll come back to this.

3) Even with the poorly coded aim assist, quickscoping wasn't even overpowered, ARing and SMGing would beat quickscoping most of the time.

Except it never does it only equalizes with headshots, snipers can kill in two/three shots to the torso.
AR/SMG not so much. (possible AR tbh, thinking on it)

4) Don't be lazy (and break a play style); properly code aim assist but I guess that's too hard

It's not breaking the play style, the play style is broken.
As mentioned, the sniper is a powerful gun regardless. Imagine if they just straight up gave us accurate hip firing people would fly off the handle about it.
We don't have that, why? Because it would be Op.
So being able to quick scope like that is pretty much the same thing, running and gunning with a bolt action IS OP.

The most important thing for competitive online gaming is balance among classes and play styles. Why buy and play a game where the developer purposefully makes the game unbalanced?

You don't know what balance is if you think quick scoping isn't breaking the game. Snipers Should at distance, that way other classes have advantages over it (Close range). If you take that away from other classes because a sniper can quick scope then yeah,your sniper is broken.
Sorry, you're just flat out wrong.

 

[Wing Dairu]

THANK GOD! You don't know how much that ability bugs me.
I was playing TF2 once and some little kid came on and immediately started complaining about the game's inability to quickscope. WELL EXCUSE ME FOR ACTUALLY WANTING TO SNIPE.

 

[Goldeneye1989]

''camp at the back of the map being a ***** ass sniper'' he means camp at the back of the map being a normal sniper...

'

No thats not even a normal sniper, a normal sniper has a spoter to judge range and wind as well as target confirmation.

You want a normal sniper thats what you gota get.

 

[Frozen Donkey Wheel2]

Oh, no. Now you have to actually play like a fucking sniper instead of using what is CLEARLY abuse of the auto-aim.

Snipers are supposed to be long-range. It IS more realistic this way. And I don't consider "You're fuckin'...you're stupid" to be an adequate rebuttal to my opinion.

Also, it was a poor choice to talk about how quickscoping doesn't work while a montage of successful quickscopes was playing.