Which is more credible in terms of K/D ratio showing skill? Gears 2 or COD:WAW?

sorry to burst your bubble....gears of war 2 is a shooterOfficialBed

[QUOTE="OfficialBed"]sorry to burst your bubble....gears of war 2 is a shooterNicAgent

i know, as well as everyone else, that gears of war is not a fps...it is a tps, just like you said....a tps is still a shooter

It's more important in gears...stupid stuff like spawn deaths don't happen and each life is a lot more important in Gears as some gametypes you don't respawn if you die in the round.

Call of Duty is a lot of fast paced run in gun where you're going to go 1:1 a lot. Bad spawns and you die so fast it makes it hard to stay alive in CoD, whereas gears is like Halo, if someone gets a drop on you sometimes you can jump around and survive. In CoD if someone gets the drop on you, consider yourself dead.

If you played nothing but Search and Destroy in CoD it would be about the same.

CoD:WaW it's first c first kill so you can b a rly good person and get killed by a kid who has been playing 360 for 2hrs in his life, but in gears u have 2 b rly good 2 get kills which makes each kill that more rewarding.Dawq902

I voted Gears of war 2. In gears, there is no doubt about who has betterskills or not, a 1v1 fight is all about clutch aiming, diving, weapon switching, and the like..

In CoD5, it DOES take skill, but with dying so fast, it just takes a couple lucky shots, or one grenade.  In Gears 2 you have to be consistent to get every kill and each life means so much more because most gametypes you dont respawn until the end of the round.

jav

[QUOTE="OfficialBed"]sorry to burst your bubble....gears of war 2 is a shooterNicAgent

thanks mr. obvious. We all know Gears is a TPS. And honestly, how could you have possibly thought that Gears of War 2 wasn't a shooter?

Secondly, who cares about K/D Ratio, it doesn't matter, seeing how it's only a game. And I'm not sure why you went into so much depth about Gears 2 when this is a K/D ratio thread, but w/e.... 

[QUOTE="NicAgent"][QUOTE="OfficialBed"]sorry to burst your bubble....gears of war 2 is a shootermohfrontline

thanks mr. obvious. We all know Gears is a TPS. And honestly, how could you have possibly thought that Gears of War 2 wasn't a shooter?

Secondly, who cares about K/D Ratio, it doesn't matter, seeing how it's only a game. And I'm not sure why you went into so much depth about Gears 2 when this is a K/D ratio thread, but w/e.... 

I voted for Gears 2 because there's more tactics involved. I agree with the above post that anyone can go on Call of Duty and get a kill, but it's much harder to do so on Gears. LtDan1989

LOL nicesig...i see those gas prices in no longer than 20 years..considering our diminishing crude oil supplyCaprellid

My vote goes to Gears. It just feels more intense than COD.thisguy51

I voted for Gears 2 because there's more tactics involved. I agree with the above post that anyone can go on Call of Duty and get a kill, but it's much harder to do so on Gears. LtDan1989

More tactics than Cod? I disagree completely.

I think COD is far more "intense" and "credible". Although you can just go run and gun and rack up kills, you will get killed a lot as well. The best players in COD can still rack up kills, but without dying often, and that takes a good amount of skill.

COD relies far more on reflex, a good eye, and instincts. If you can pick out tough-to-see enemies easily and have fast reflex and precise aim, you can dominate... but you still have to be smart and move around enough. If you put yourself in a bad spot, you really don't have time to recover. You make one mistake and you're dead. I equate it to No-Limit poker vs. Limit Poker. Limit poker, as in Gears 2, is a methodical game. You slowly cut down on the other opponents overtime and the best player wins in the end. Skill is important, but there isn't much at stake on each hand, its the sum of the session. No-Limit Poker, like COD, is a tougher game where you always have to be on your guard because you can lose it all in just one hand. One mistake can cost you your whole stack in NL poker, just as in COD, and there is more long term skill. A bad COD player can rack up kills on any given map, just as a bad NL poker player can get lucky on one hand and double up, but only the best can win long term or maintain great K/D ratios.

They both require a lot of skill to master, they just require different types of skill. One game is all about reflex, accuracy, eyesite, map familiarty, and tactics; the other is more about game tactics with much more emphasis on close-quarters combat, weapon specialization, etc.

I grew up on Half-Life mods and Counter-Strike, so I prefer the FPS that are realistic and you can die easily, making accuracy and quickness the most important atribute. I simply find games annoying when I can't take out an enemy with a well aimed headshot or a couple shots to the chest.  I try to limit my deaths more than I try to rake up kills.  For instance, if I might have a shot at someone, but it would be very risky, I might not take the shot and rather look to pick up another target or get a better spot on the current target.  Sure, I might get more kills if i just took the shot, but I'd also likely die often.  Its like in NL poker, it's about risk/reward.   You don't want to take big risks.  You are waiting for the other players to make mistakes (while also trying to force them into making mistakes) and capitolize on them.   

I think its about how you play the game.