Barrett M107 (that one?) isn't, but then it's based on an AMR, Barrett M82. Remington MSR is based off M24 (and that in turn is based off Remington 700), if I remember correctly. AS 50 is an AMR. No idea what "L118" is even supposed to be.

As I wrote earlier - I primarily play ArmA 2 nowadays. The CoD series was always rather too silly for me.

And then design a whole new dashboard around the Kinect sensor and it's use, being like the Wii still and not releasing any fun action games for the normal gamer.

http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/Barrett#Call_of_Duty:_Modern_Warfare_3
http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/L118#Call_of_Duty:_Modern_Warfare_3 - It's similar to the M40A3 from CoD4
http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/AS50#Call_of_Duty:_Modern_Warfare_3
http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/MSR#Call_of_Duty:_Modern_Warfare_3
http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/RSASS#Call_of_Duty:_Modern_Warfare_3
The Draganov isn't worth posting since no one uses it often.

Criticisms on board, like? I don't get what you mean with the last part

See, two of them are AMR (Barrett M82 and Accuracy International AS50) and shouldn't even work this way. The Remington rifles (MSR and SASS) seem to be based on the good old 700/M24. The L118A from the "Arctic Warfare" series is basically the only "pure" sniper rifle in the list. And most of the sniper rifles in actual use today are indeed derived from normal rifles - M110 is derived from the AR-10, SR-25 from the AR-15/M16, the M39 from the M14 and so on.

But as I wrote, the CoD series was always a little bit too silly for me, and running around "quickly" using an AMR to kill people in close quarters is just another example in a long, long list of things which won't allow me to take the game seriously.

I just seen capitals and numbers, assuming they are gun
Either way, I don't think any soldier can run with one and quickly higher the scope and fire without bursting something on their face or some damage to the arms.

EDIT: When I think of it (not researched yet) wasn't the Barrett .50cal a cannon of sorts that was modded to be a tank piercing sniper that then got adapted to be an AR for its sheer man stopping, rather ripping, power?

I use the Dragunov.

So do I rarely, no one online has yet to kill me with one in the 1000+ games I've joined.
It's just so rare online now compared to COD4 where it was a regular and the Barrett was the out cast.

That's what "AMR" (Anti-Materiel Rifle) means. They are meant to be used to disable cars, lightly armoured vehicles and installations. The "strupped down" version (Barrett M107) still packs quite a recoil, however.

The strive for instant gratification through simplistic and unrewarding gameplay and overall setup.
The massappeal focus causing the first point.
Visuals over substance mentality.
Always online - and choris online activation procedures - DRM for singleplayer games.
The whole concept of DLC.

The trend of turning video games into push button movies.

Online Multiplayer. I hate it. All of it. Unless the game is built around it (MMO) I pass.

I remember the days of split screen and co op system link. The good old days.

Also, DLCs. I'm talking stupid little ones. Like Horse Armor, or the Gun Runner's Arsenal, or stupid map packs. Release a full game, plus full expansions or don't bother.

The thing that irrates me the most though is there are stupid people that continue to pay for stuff like this.

Nothin like watching the other guys screen to figure out where he is

Best Tactic Ever.

I honestly don't mind the "free, day-of-release DLC" thing.... it's certainly a better form of "let's get some money back from the used game market" (since it's free to new buyers, but costs some $ for used) than the various other obnoxious methods some companies are using.

(while, yes, I've bought used games from Game$top; I can certainly understand the frustration of the game developers, seeing Gamestop/etc grabbing all those profits off their IP without them getting any of it. The "free DLC for new buyers" thing feels like a much nicer solution compared to, oh, trying to get used sales made illegal, or the currently popular "lock every game you buy to a user account so that you can never sell/loan/trade/transfer it" thing.)

Well, not originally. At first when the consoles were being announced they just derided the Wii as gimmicky and ridiculous. Then it sold way more than either of them, and their position quickly changed to "We thought of it first!"

1. DLC
2. Achievements

Both of which I consider to be cardinal, unforgivable sins spawned by Xbox Live.

As much as I hate QTE's with a passion, it isn't the actual core of them I hate. It is the unwarranted 'necessity' to make the image of whichever button you need to press come up on the screen at the time you need to press it. Sometimes it's the size of a dime, while other times it's the size of the moon. Either way, it's ridiculous.

Can any of you guys remember a time where the actual player had to know or figure out what to do? Back when it wasn't "Press A to do a backflip, decapitate, teabag, dance, and flip off the boss." and it was something more like "You could execute some crazy finisher if you knew it was F, F, D,B,HP,HP, LP, BL."

The lure of video games was that they actually took effort and skill, and a five year old isn't going to be able to beat every single game that has been released in the past 18 years with equal non-effort.

QTEs of today would benefit immensely if they at least didn't tell you what button to press. It would make it feel more like you're actually good enough to be doing what is happening on the screen.

Achievements IMO are a fantastic idea, which should be applied even further to give gamers prizes and other goodies when you get say 1000/1000 points in a game.

And working on achievements can add hundreds of hours to a game.

FFXIII is one of them, but there are tons of factors making up the overall problem. Single player games, FPS in particular, obsessed with having a cinematic narrative restricting players to wandering around in one-way corridors with invisible walls galore, not even being able to open doors by yourself unless your NPC teammates are scripted to do so, etc.
Very story-heavy games all too often really on a passive narrative to further the plot, via tons of cutscenes or passive dialog to further the plot. The extreme example being MGS4.
QTEs were introduced to make cutscenes more interactive, but in practice this often means that developers will plaster their games with QTE cutscenes instead of thinking up ways to make the core gameplay mechanics more exciting.

All of these things water down the interactivity which is the very point of video games in the first place.

Not too keen on quick-time events. I must also agree with the others that the "dumbing down" that is going on makes me sad. Games are getting more commercial and casual and therefore the companies get more money by making non-hard games that pretty much everyone can finish. I know back in the 90s games were more difficult and demanding, and I had no problem beating them. Games aren't fun if they aren't a challenge, most of the time that is. I agree with pretty much everything Ellert said in post #2 and I feel the exact same way.

Another issue is the DLC trend. It seems that most developers just leave some finished parts out of the game just to release them again later for more cash. They're making money but oh my god how stupid it is. I know this isn't the case for some DLCs, but there's no denying this happens.

It's just different types of games rather than some all-encompassing design philosophy. Japanese games have generally told linear stories via cutscene, offering little interactivity beyond advancing dialogue. It's actually something that I prefer. I have next to no interest in interacting with a game's story, be it dialogue options, multiple endings, having control of characters' relationships, etc. There's usually more than enough gameplay/interactivity elsewhere to keep these games from feeling like movies.

Besides, for every developer or gamer that feels the way I do, there's probably a handful that feel the exact opposite, especially these days. If anything, gaming in general is moving away from that, much to my dismay.

I think gaming is in a pretty good state right now, surely some markets are suffering but overall I think its just a phase where one genre dominates or produces better games than others. I do hate motion control but understand that it is more about the technological steps forward than any experience enhancement it offers in games. Overall I would say that I've seen games stop forcing craptastic multiplayer on me, stupid and dated mechanics are non existent and things seem pretty great. Although I would have to see this is only the case for games I actually play, you see as a consumer in a capitalist market I understand that it is my duty to do some legwork on the products I wish to purchase. If several magazines mention a feature that doesnt fly with me and I dont feel the game deserves my money then I will be against it.

Also DLC is not a bad feature in games, look at Oblivion and Fallout 3( yes even horse armor has its merits to some people like me), however prerelease DLC is kind of a shoddy marketing gimmick that needs to die.
One gimmick that I dislike is the limiting of customization that some games have, Saints Row 3 and even Skyrim to a degree limited aspects of customization that were available in previous entries( Skyrim gets it a little easier because while it took away greaves,cuirass, pauldrons and the like etc, it also added facial hair,dual wielding, age , body size and unconstricted classes. Most of the trends I spot are often things that could go either way, while I may enjoy stat rolls to see if my attack landed in a game like NVN or Fallout 3 and its sometimes disheartening to be able to hack and slash in certain RPGS, I also have to say that I do enjoy actually attacking things as well. You cant please everyone and if things start to get stale I change it up.

I find it difficult to compare Horse Armour which makes one NPC able to put armour on your horse to the Gunrunner's Arsenal which adds new weapons, new ammo, new modifications and spreads them around to most of the merchants in the Mojave and also adds a new perk and 21 new challenges.

But it's armor! For your horse!

It won't do much good against the Lil' Devil.