Higby Wants Your Thoughts on Iron Sights for FPS..... - Page 19

Whalenator · 2012-02-11, 09:27 PM

Originally Posted by deltase

Tribes Ascend, in which there are no iron sights, i feel like i can shoot someone, at the same time scan for nearby enemies and position myself with ease.
Oh please make it like TF2 or HL or Tribes without IS's!

Although the use of no reticule in Ascend is an example, it's not a good one.
you're moving at ~150km/s minimum. Plus you can zoom in if you want.

ALSO TRIBES ASCEND IS A TERRIBLE EXCUSE FOR A TRIBES SEQUEL

AncientVanu · 2012-02-12, 04:27 AM

I'm definitely for iron sights in PS2. Medium and long range shooting without using iron sights, reflex sights, or scopes would feel weird, unreal-tribes-like... IMO not adding iron sights would make PS2 look kind of arcady, not a good thing.

General M · 2012-02-12, 04:39 AM

Not that there won't be, but there should be iron sights for reasons that others have said.

XLynxX · 2012-02-12, 06:04 AM

A game of this scale, modernised with the graphics and engine it has, and not putting in ironsights would be suicide.

Modern day gamers want ironsights, no offence but many of the people complaining in here keep talking about games like HL2 (came out over 10 years ago, it's population is tiny), TF2 (arena shooter, can't compare with a game like this on this scale). Image BF without ironsights. People want a realist aiming system, not one that was found to be obsolete 10 years ago and therefore every decent FPS now uses ironsights.

Ironsights slow down gameplay by a milisecond, if you think otherwise then obviously your right mouse button is broken. Ironsights also make the game more tactical, allowing more cover of the body behind objects and will make team units more strategic and intelligent.

texico · 2012-02-12, 08:05 AM

I can easily imagine BF without ironsights. I try not to even use the damn things.

If they're in PS2, I'd like to see them just be there to add a little extra accuracy/range on to the very end of your weapon's shooting range, so when you're trying to land the last few bullets on a person running away/in the distance you can ironsight and finish him off - somebody focusing like that is going to be staying fairly still.

I wish the team would make that system slightly more unique though, so it just doesn't feel like something regurgitated from Call of Battlefield. Why not spice it up with some kind of visual overlay projected from the gun that gives the player the "ironsight" view or something? Something that fits in more with PlanetSide's sci-fi feel, especially with the VS.

Tamas · 2012-02-12, 08:52 AM

Well I love them. Sometimes a weapon "feels good" with iron sights. As It's optional, I'm glad they are added - for close quarter battles I still bring a rifle in most games, and having iron sights helps a lot.

CutterJohn · 2012-02-12, 09:34 AM

If you don't want to use iron sights, go with the MCG. I highly doubt it will have them.

(Also, now I wonder what they could put on the mouse button in place of iron sights..)

DayOne · 2012-02-12, 09:37 AM

Originally Posted by CutterJohn

If you don't want to use iron sights, go with the MCG. I highly doubt it will have them.

(Also, now I wonder what they could put on the mouse button in place of iron sights..)

Spin it up perhaps?

XLynxX · 2012-02-12, 12:51 PM

Originally Posted by texico

I can easily imagine BF without ironsights. I try not to even use the damn things.

No offence but do you ever get a kill? Haha.

Rbstr · 2012-02-12, 12:54 PM

Originally Posted by XLynxX

No offence but do you ever get a kill? Haha.

Yeah seriously, if you want to kill someone from anything but point blank, how do you manage to hit them?

Coreldan · 2012-02-12, 03:29 PM

Originally Posted by DayOne

Spin it up perhaps?

I remember in the earlier games (Rainbow Six comes to mind) it was often either reload or switching fire mode, from what I remember usually reload though.

bmfof · 2012-02-12, 03:43 PM

Originally Posted by Rbstr

Yeah seriously, if you want to kill someone from anything but point blank, how do you manage to hit them?

Playing an engi, I win every single close- to mid-range engagement without using ironsights with the A91. Excluding fighting other players with similar mindset and the right weapons. There's a reason why the best weapons in the game are those with the smallest initial crossair and least initial spread - if you're good you get the first 4-5 shots in before your aim goes to shit.

Shade Millith · 2012-02-12, 05:15 PM

Originally Posted by XLynxX

Image BF without ironsights.

Easily. Since the original BF1942 didn't even have them. I enjoyed the game far, FAR more back then. Since I wouldn't have the stupid gun taking up half my screen every time I wanted to fire the damn thing.

And they're not even WELL DONE iron sights either. They still have their COF with bloom. If they were to be actual Iron sights, they'd use the recoil moving the screen around to affect accuracy. It's complete bullshit firing dead aim at someone, and missing because your magic COF had bloomed.

Everyone keeps going on about 'Realism', but those Iron sights are completely unrealistic. Not to mention there's no way to keep a second eye open so I can see past the gun, or an option to move the weapon slightly away from my face to see. It's either hip or half-blind.

Realism my arse. Either do Iron Sights RIGHT, or don't do them at all.

Livefire · 2012-02-13, 04:41 PM

I'm totally for iron sights if they do them right and I can upgrade all the weapons with scopes and advanced optics.

Revanant · 2012-02-13, 07:42 PM

My thoughts on iron sights:

My best gaming moment of the weekend came on the Danzig map of Red Orchestra. I was approaching a corner with the PPSH-41. It occurred to me that I might run into some Germans, so I brought my sights up.

I turned the corner and came face to face with two Nazis walking towards me, about 5 meters away. A two-second burst from the PPSH cut them both down before they even had a chance to fire.

It felt amazing because:

1) Killing two enemies with a short submachine gun burst felt and looked realistic.

2) The game rewarded my tactical foresight and careful play.

3) The 1-shot damage model of Red Orchestra already had me glued to my chair in a way which few other games (Day of Defeat, RO2) can manage.

And for those of you who claim my experience wasn't skillful, I will assert that you've never tried to fire the Red Orchestra PPSH-41 :P.

Iron sights in PS2 are a good thing. While I find that iron sights tend to make shooting more rewarding, I also think it signals an intent for PS2 to be a more realistic shooter. Iron sights don't slow combat down, but they do make it a more thoughtful experience. If they slow your movement speed, you have to make a choice as to whether it is more appropriate to move well or shoot straight-- which usually tends to lead to the conclusion that the best solution is to find cover and then shoot.

When it comes to point-blank combat--you don't need iron sights to kill someone point blank. In fact, you don't even need crosshairs, as many RO/RO2 players and generic FPS snipers can attest.

Conclusion: Iron sights make combat more immersive, and force players to make tactical decisions and rely on team play instead of playing Rambo with a room full of enemies. They also signal an intent to make combat more realistic--a decision I wholeheartedly applaud.

My ideal Planetside would be a game with realistic damage modelling and low time-to-kill weapons. I believe in equality--no matter the weapon, we infantry players should be able to do to each other what Reaver pilots used to do to us all the time in PS1. 1-shot kills should not be the exclusive privilege of flyboys--I deserve to be able to plug my fellow footsoldiers with equal abandon and aplomb.

It's only fair

.