How MNC pwns Halo Reach

That's CoD. Twitch is important, but how you engage is much more so.

Because you can die so easily tactics and caution are absolutely vital. You also die easily which is more realistic. Twitch skills are vital in any tactical shooter as missing a shot is big.

That's your opinion and it isn't one shared by the vast majority of the gaming world. Tactics are king in CoD because the guns are so deadly.

This is pointless. If you want to pretend there's no tactics in CoD be my guest, the rest of the world knows better.

1 last thing:

That is the literal definition of a skill cap. How far your skill can take you within the boundaries of the game. Skill can seperate players more in CoD than MNC as your comments show.[/quote]

Skill Cap has always been a player defined concept to my knowledge. Just for fun, why don't you find me the literal definition you are quoting. I got nothing from google other than forum posts where people were trying to define skill cap.

I always understood the skill cap to mean: the highest level you could possibly achieve for utilizing every aspect of your game play. I would argue that in CoD, there is very little to achieve skill cap wise beyond twitch aiming, map knowledge/control, and adaptation skills.

In MNC, you have 6 classes with extremely different roles, whose capabilities as a unit change dramatically by adding different combinations of different classes together. There is likely much more to master in each individual class in MNC (and certainly more as a whole) than there is in CoD.

And you say we're grasping. I don't ever ask the Gamestop guys anything, because they almost never know what they're talking about.

Well sure, but I never enshrined it as a "tactic."

You're taking a lot for granted, including that none of us in disagreement were ever any good at CoD. Giving CoD players a lot of credit, too. Turnabout being fair play, have you considered that you think it takes so much skill because it was hard for you?

Oh well, I'm yanking your chain. This is probably the point at which folks agree to disagree. We're all basically arguing definitions at this point, which is always pointless.

Speaking of definitions, "strategy" and "tactics" don't mean the same thing.

Edit:

Just for fun, I decided to explore this a little. Upon looking up Modern Warfare 2 at Gamestop, Gamespot, GiantBomb, GameInformer, Toys-R-Us, Wal-Mart, and Infinity Ward's official site, the game is classified as simply a shooter, or an action game. The word "tactics" only came up in the Toys-R-Us description, where your AI enemies in the singleplayer campaign were described as using "surprising tactics." I suspect that was copied and pasted from the back of the box.

-The majority of GAMERS who actually know the difference between these genres would absolutely back me on this argument. The vast majority of people who play CoD don't know what a tactical shooter is, and probably exclusively play CoD/Halo. The marketing/reviews which call this game a tac shooter are absolutely uneducated on the subject, or just made poor word choices, or intentionally made such word choices in an attempt to diversify their market.

-I have never argued there are no tactics in CoD. Not once. Stop saying that.

Well I've been playing tactical shooters since the 1st Rainbow Six. CoD plays just like them. You just move faster. /shrug

But maybe you know better than everyone else. You should probably write a letter or something so we stop confusing these tactical shooting games with tactical shooters.

On the back of the box, it mentions twice that it is an action game, but there is nothing about tactics.

Rainbow 6 doesn't say tactical either. So much for your argument.

I know one thing for sure. We all have too much time on our hands. DEBATE THAT!

Well, the Gamestop people describe that one as tactical, at least.

And CoD plays just like Rainbow 6?! That cements it, we're just speaking two different languages.

Yeah, this is pretty common knowledge, and you'll get a flash/stun to the face if you try this against anyone with half a brain, or they will simply just camp the objective and kill you regardless of what door they come in.

This tactic would not do anything to change the choking/twitch metagame.

A better example of a tactic would be OMA to a M21 Coldblooded with thermal, throw a smoke grenade, and shoot through the smoke to counter most sniper choke routes. Then switch back to your other loadout.

Fortunately, MLG and Game battles typically bans OMA, so there goes an opportunity for actual depth to be added to the game.

I did this regularly in matchmaking SnD and I got so much hate mail it was insane. The CoD community seems to FROWN upon adding more tactics to the game. Twitch will always be king with that fanbase, both in the public and the competitive scene.

It plays a lot like vegas. Remove the cover system and speed up movement and they would play pretty similar. I will say the 1st rainbow 6 was very different.

This is almost sig worthy. I think I'm done here.

Vegas =/= Original Rainbow Six.

Well sure a game will play just like CoD if you turn it into CoD.

I agree, Hudson. Vegas was a significant departure for Rainbow Six. I'm hoping future games in the franchise will return to form.

Just out of curiosity as I don't have a gamestop near me, shop at gamestop or anything like that, (I prefer bestbuy) but when did gamestop employees become the end all be all authoritative on game genres?

but Vegas = Tactical shooter. Right?

Man you guys are desperate to come up with any kind of point, has this debate been that rough on you?. :lol:
CoD plays like modern tactical shooters. Better? I should have clarified I suppose.

Tactical shooters have evolved. You should know this if you really have been playing them.

Tell me, was counter strike a tactical shooter?

CoD is a way to compensate for not getting laid.

According to Gamestop, anyway. It's moreso than CoD, but less so than earlier iterations. Shocking that there could be a gradient, I know.

Edit: In fact, I'd bet that the shift in design for Vegas was born out of a desire to horn in on CoD's commercial success.

That's basically what I said, too. That silliness started here:

I was making the point that it's commonly accepted as a tactical shooter. I was establishing the fact that it's common knowledge, so common in fact that even a gamestop employee knows it. If your stance is "I don't care what the rest of the world thinks only what I say matters" well it's pointless to even talk to you. I hope that's not the case because that would be pretty sad.

Wait, weren't you talking about Toys R Us a minute ago? :lol:

And here I thought you had missed that part. But don't go fobbing it off as a non sequitur now, or you'll give yourself up as a word twister. The point was that it doesn't appear to be commonly accepted as "tactical" by the rest of the world.

Here it is again, for convenience's sake.

Not sure how this thread got on the topic of MNC vs CoD, given the title

I would say games that have such huge variance in how to play should not even be compared in any way, no matter if they are both termed "shooters." I could understand debating different game types in the same game, but even that might be a foolhardy exercise. There are just too many factors that go into it for any person to analyze effectively.

However, in response to Hudson's post about the 1v5 thing, that can happen in MNC also as after a fashion. Your team could be losing the whole game, but if you make it to OT, one person can make it to the other base and destroy the money ball. Not saying this means anything at all regarding which game is more tactical, just pointing it out.

Was counter strike a tactical shooter?