@wrathofconn: I was just poking fun at myself for rambling too much.

I don't know if it comes down on me to be the curator of that page. I mean, I'm not a mod, what can I even do other than make submissions and participate in the thread? I honestly don't know as my wiki edits have basically been some game-adding and cleanup; very little participation in the wiki community, I'm afraid.

I do agree that Renegade Ops doesn't fit this description. Backpacks are pretty specific, as are backs. A tank doesn't have a back. It may have a butt though. Would be more appropriate in a "shoot the weakpoint" and "expose the weakpoint" page.

Edit: And on that note, I could see the "Shoot the Backpack" thing being a sub-category for "Shoot the Weakpoint." Not really my call though.

@Duffyside: Yup. Now you see the issue of specificity. Also, anyone can unlink games from the list at the bottom, like I just did for Renegade Ops. So if you want to curate it, you can in that sense.

@wrathofconn said:

...This should be a paragraph on the 'Weak Point' page.

This I can fully get behind. I believe it happens frequently enough, as Duffyside has said, to warrant explicitly pointing it out, but if were added as its own section in the 'Weak Point' page, it would still be one hundred percent correct and be prominently displayed. The definition as I see it, is more along the lines of the enemy being near invulnerable without hitting the pack and making it explode. This screams weak point to me. Especially since it seems to be getting twisted by alot of minor points, such as grunts' methane packs. Those are not 'weak points.' This has to be at least part of 'weak points', or it will not be well defined enough to stand alone, with other people misinterpreting it.

In Warhammer: Space Marine, the orks in the flying sequence have rockets on their backs which you can shoot to blow up. That count?

Shadows of the damned? A few boss fights, maybe...I think?

Here's a proposal I was thinking about, in order to establish a clear enough difference between Shoot the Backpack and Weak Spot, as well as set down the ground rules. This is just me tossing ideas at the wall, so tell me what you think -- it might be a bad idea, I don't know.

Since there is already a page dedicated to Weak Spots, I'd argue that this page's focus should be that Shooting the Backpack is the most desirable way to kill an enemy, not simply (or even necessarily at all) the easiest. This could be for as simple a reason as it saving ammo (if the enemy is otherwise a little bit of a bullet sponge, like in Gears), or because it has some other form of benefit, such as dealing splash damage to surrounding enemies.

It could be argued that it's easier to kill a Flame Grenadier in Gears 2/3 by just aiming for center mass (or for the head, if you're using a Longshot or Boltok pistol), because the fuel tank is a very small target when you're looking at them head-on. However, it's more desirable to shoot them in the backpack because of the explosion, which can take out other nearby enemies as well.

Basically, if an enemy is only feasibly taken down by shooting it in the backpack -- whether due to being invincible everywhere else, or they can take so much damage that it will take a very noticeably longer time to drop them -- then it falls under Weak Spot. If it's simply a more desirable option, not necessarily the easiest, then it's Shoot the Backpack.

I do see the point some people have been making about the concept perhaps being too redundant, however. While there are certainly aspects that are distinct enough to stand apart from Weak Spot or Exploding Barrel, there is also going to be a large amount of overlap, no matter what criteria we set. I think going with desirability ("shoot the backpack for fun and profit") as the focus instead of ease or necessity ("shoot the backpack if you want to live") is at least a step away from Weak Spot, though.