User blog comment:Flamesword300/DISLIKES/CONS PART 2/@comment-26535669-20130807125246/@comment-75.70.245.159-20130808171439

BOps1 had the worst combination of maps ever simply because they had no balance and they were SOOOOOOO BORING. They all promoted SMG's, Shotgun's and AR's. Plus they had the worst COD map ever (Nuketown). What makes Jungle long range? Granted, there are some long range areas but most of them aren't used. Crisis was one of 3 good maps, the others being Array and Hazard. For the most part BOps1 had very little to offer as far as long range maps go so I'll have to disagree with you there.

I do agree with you on the fact that it's bullshit that quickscopers get off easy and "hardscopers" aka real snipers get so much crap for using the sniper rifle the right way.

I disagree with you on the last stand thing. If I downed the guy, that means I would've killed him so I deserve the kill.

BOps2 may be very fast paced but the choppy gampelay slows it down a lot. All of the MW's felt way more fluent and therefore made it feel more fast-paced.

One of the few things Treyarch got right in BOps2 is weapon diversity so I agree with the original post on this one.

Rapid fire does work well if you can control it so I don't have any complaints. It only gives you an advantage at a certain range so it is balanced.