Hot take: Mw2 had so many "unbalanced" things that actually resulted in a pretty balanced game experience as opposed to the sanitized "every gun is the same level of useless" in games today.
~~~ embed:1446882592482111488?t=nkLNDzt1yrKNGHMay6Ju-A&s=19 twitter metadata:Y2hhcmxpZUlOVEVMfHxodHRwczovL3R3aXR0ZXIuY29tL2NoYXJsaWVJTlRFTC9zdGF0dXMvMTQ0Njg4MjU5MjQ4MjExMTQ4OHw= ~~~
Posted via D.Buzz
I haven't played MW2, (my brother did,) but I believe what you're talking about is the "Perfect Imbalance" effect:
Posted via D.Buzz
Interesting. I didn't know about this concept, but yes that's exactly the kind of game that MW2 was. My brother loved using dual wield pistols and I could use the UMP submachine gun. We both had a fun experience and the game didn't force me to pick any "meta" weapon.
Posted via D.Buzz
The concept doesn't prevent the game from having a Meta weapon, it just slows the meta-process from going stale.
I think if a game doesn't have an update in a long while, there will come a point where a sure-win strategy is found, but a playstyle-based imbalance slows that...
Posted via D.Buzz