Yeah, if you want to do a proper comparison between the CoD games, using PC @max settings should be a given. There's little to no sense in comparing console iterations, which is no different from trying to compare scaled down settings on PC.
I'm not sure what a "proper comparison" is. Since my only home gaming platform is the PS3, the best comparison for me is a comparison among the PS3 iterations. There's been a definite improvement from each to the next, although IMO, the contest between MW2, BO, and MW3 graphically is a wash. Seems they've gotten about as far as they can and still keep the thing at 60 fps (mostly).
Cheezdoodles said:
For me There was something with the gun play that was off in blops! I never managed to put my finger on something in particular, firing and using weapons just seemed better in mw2 and now the same in mw3.
There's a lot more recoil on the guns in Black Ops, and there's no Stopping Power perk. While there's no Stopping Power in MW3, they increased the effective DPS on every gun so that it feels like you're playing with it anyway.
I have never understood people's complaints about quickscope and one shot kill snipers (do note that only stomach and upwards is instakill and not arms etc) .
Have you ever used a rifle with a scope on it? Rapid target acquisition is virtually impossible with a high-power scope. It's hard enough with an M14, let alone with some of the heavier guns they put in the game. Not only that, but quickscoping is only possible in COD because the game auto-aims your crosshairs when you bring up the scope. The other thing is that a lot of the large-caliber rifles that appear in these games are nearly impossible to shoulder-fire (the PTRS-41 in W@W, for example, was an anti-tank rifle...it was also nearly 7 feet/over 2m long). The purpose of a .50 cal isn't shooting people; it's shooting vehicles. They're too big, too loud, and too slow to be useful anti-personnel weapons. For example
im pretty sure taking a round from a .50 bmg cal Barrett ( which has confirmed real life kills at distances of around 3km and that is able to punch a hole through an engine block )at close range in any place where u have organs means death!
You would not take a round from an M82 in close quarters, because the weapon is over 4 feet (1.2m) long and weighs 30 lbs (13 kg). That's sort of what I'm talking about.
Since maps are close quarters and usually in urban areas this makes proper sniping relatively harder than larger maps more open maps...Anyways, quickscoping is there because sniper rifles are at a huge disadvantage in cqc!
Exactly. Sniper rifles are long-range weapons. They're meant to be shot from a prone position in a camouflaged areas. That simply won't work in COD, which is why they have to absurdify the mechanics to the point where they only have cosmetic similarity with real guns. It sort of works in the bigger maps in W@W (e.g., Seelow), but the LOL I SPAWN BEHIND U mechanic, the killcam, and the radar seriously hurt it.
Now before you object that COD isn't a weapon sim, I realize that. But see, that's why I don't like their spawn mechanic. The core mechanics make sniping (i.e. going prone behind a battle line in a camouflaged area) impossible. To rectify that, they made the sniper rifles into something ridiculous. If they had team spawn areas, they wouldn't have to do that. Same problem with MMGs (some LMGs can be shoulder-fired; MMGs cannot). To me, it pushes the game over the line from "arcadey combat game" to "Wile E Coyote vs Roadrunner," which I don't like.
