I know a lot of us hate CoD, I understand that, but really would it be so bad now to take CoD's gameplay and add it to DUST's depth? Some people would complain but at some point you have to come to the realization that CoD is popular because it's...Finished. Thoughts?

I believe this is exactly what TitanFall may be doing.

Peace! Peace! I appease to all, for all here are sensible. Let us be gentleman on this forum. No need for foul language. Let everyone speak their mind, honest, true and respectable, say I.

Yes. It would be very bad. The only reason it is popular is because it is a AAA game that gets tons of marketing. (Plus there are some idiots that buy the same game over and over.)

Personally I'd rather CCP take inspiration from Killzone 3, if anything.

Ok...first off I will list the points of CoD that are good for main stream, casual gaming. Then I will explain why they are bad for a game like Dust.

1. All guns are reskins of other guns. Creates a false sense of variety without ever having to worry about balance, great for casual games. Eliminates any actual variety in weapons of the same category, which is bad for games with a meaningful progression.

2. Low health values and high damage values. Makes fire fights extremely fast paced and eliminates potential balance issues when all weapons can kill in 1-3 shots. This would completely invalidate suit variety in Dust.

3. High hip fire spread, rapid ADS with spread, bullet penetration. Creates a minimal skill gap between highly skilled players and average to low skill players by adding randomness to the game to maximize margin of error, again great for casual. When it comes to Dust players who have invested weeks or months into skills for specific weapons don't want randomness, they want their gun to behave predictably and dependably...espescially when against a heavy, every shot must count.

4. Confined maps designed to funnel combat into key areas. In CoD this keeps the games pace up and action packed from start to finish. In Dust, this would turn into limiting of vehicles or pure vehicle superiority depending on maps, as either there would be no room for a vehicle or nowhere to hide from one.

5. Kill streaks. Designed to be constantly rewarding players in meaningful game altering ways, this is good for arcade style games like CoD. On the other hand, in a game where you have to buy each individual piece of your load out, do you want your gear constantly being lost to automated and free kill streak rewards?

6. Overall multiplayer set up. P2P game hosting is great for a casual game in that if you join a laggy game you just leave and try again. For a game like Dust, servers are required. The Eve connectivity, player market, planetary conquest, and many future features are not possible on a P2P set up. Besides, P2P multiplayer is an old and out dated model for multiplayer gaming anyway, it is used soley because it is cheap.

7. Kill centric game modes. Again great for casual, arcade style like CoD, where 95% of games come down to body count. This would destroy a game like Dust though, where objective game modes are actually objective based.

I could go on, but I have already made a big enough wall of text (for which I apologize) and I don't want to waste anymore of time (mine or anyone else's) on beating the corpse. I feel I have made enough valid points and that many players will agree with them. In the end though, the main point is that not all FPS games are the same and shouldn't be either.