- con_extreme
- |
- Intrepid Legendary Member
Posted by: Dwavenhobble
Posted by: con_extreme
Posted by: Dwavenhobble
Posted by: con_extreme
*Sigh*
hey look, its fellow brit, we do tend to be -blam!-s don't we?
as for the analogy, it's kind of flawed, the rules that would be taken out of rugby would be the rule that hurt the outcome and can be abused an manipulated, removing these kind of rules improves the game and puts both teams on an even playing field
The thing being both sides start with pretty much the same kit now, removing the kit forces everyone to play the same, it doesn't show that someone is better with a certain play style, surely the winner would be the team with the best skills suited to their tactics or play style, as in say football you don't generally have the goal keeper training as a striker people are specialised to certain things and the team that combines those elements best would be the winner.
Why for example in MLG on Halo 3 was the AR removed for being unbalanced, yet the sniper which has twice the killing potential left in ?
the flaw here is that in reach, you can choose to spawn with different "kit".
edit:
quoted the wrong post..
And you can choose the be better with that kit or know how to use it better. MLG and its supporters seem to be really against choice, just saying.
when the AA's are balanced well this isn't an issue but with reach, one can choose to spawn with a bigger advantage over another person purely because he chose a different AA.
also, i think you mean linear gameplay and not generic.
[Edited on 11.22.2011 2:29 PM PST]