For many gamers who play modern FPS titles like Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3, you are probably aware of something known as "quick-scoping". The way that quick-scoping works is that a player aims into the sniper rifle scope and take the shot at almost a millisecond before the player fully zooms in. Often times, numerous kills can be made and most games like MW3 have perks for people that can have "one-shot kills".
There has been a growing debate in the gaming community about whether this sort of behavior is legal and should be tolerated. On the one hand, some gamers say that it is a skill and that it should be kept. They argue that video games are a simulation of the real world, but the real world shouldn't be used piece for piece because it's a video game and that's why people play it. In other words, to escape reality. Others are against it and say that it detracts from the fun. They argue that it takes zero skill and gives some players an unfair advantage.
I'm on the side that believes that it gives players an unfair advantage. And yes, I have never been good at quick-scoping and have, often, been the target of these players. But it all seemed cheap. These guys sit in an alley in the map and just quick-scope and rack up tons of points while others actually try to use skills like teamwork and evading skills to outgun the opponent. But just because I haven't ever quick-scoped does not mean that I am not nor ever use a sniper. I, in fact, do use a sniper rifle quite often. However, I use it as it is used in the real world because there's more satisfaction for me in knowing that I actually took time in making that shot. Whereas if all I did was see someone and shot-shot and got 2-3 people, I wouldn't have the same satisfaction in knowing that my hard work actually paid off.
One of the reasons why I did not pick up MW3 is because of this. Battlefield 3 gamers seem to take the game more seriously, actually play the roles of those skilled in assault, sniping, and other classes of war. There have been times where gamers didn't seem to take it seriously and wanted to camp all match but the game made it difficult for them to quick-scope the rest of us all match long. And there are always ways of getting to the campers such as using teamwork which always leaves the feeling of satisfaction knowing that you actually put work into something and achieved your goal. However, on the other hand, there is still satisfaction in knowing that you were able to kill someone who has been using "cheats" to win if you were able to get someone who quick-scoped an entire match.
But often times, those times we actually get the culprits were really rare. Usually I'd enter a match, get killed 20 times and get about 3 kills because of people quick-scoping and leave the match because I never felt like I had a chance. That shouldn't be in any game, in my opinion.
Each side seems to have good arguments for their view as do the other. So what's your take on it? Do you think its fair to continue letting people quick-scope for future FPS titles? Are you someone who quick-scopes, are you a victim, or does it not seem to have any effect on you at all?
And, of course, for as many people, like myself, who did not buy MW3 for QSers, I'm sure there would be many who would not buy MW3 because they made it difficult or impossible to QS. Sales' numbers should be on the minds behind these games but you can't really turn that into an argument as I see just as many people arguing from both sides.
- ► 2016 (33)
- ► 2015 (25)
- ► 2014 (57)
- ► 2013 (166)
- ▼ September (8)