I am left wondering....

(figjam) #1

I’m wondering if Brink will be just COD with ET style classes. I’m seeing iron sights. Come on! It’s a game it doesn’t need iron sights. If we want iron sights we’ll just buy COD.

Make it like ET (and I mean really like ET not like ETQW) and you’ll see all those loyal players coming back as well as a new following. We don’t need another COD like game.

If you continue down this track don’t expect a dime out of me coz I already paid for that abomination BF/ETQW game. And that was a horrible pos game that didnt even run smoothly.

I expect you guys to learn from your mistakes and make this a game for the loyal fans of ET.

(kilL_888) #2

thats a funny coincedence. i was just browsing some of my older posts. one had the ironsight topic. :slight_smile:

http://www.splashdamage.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20774&highlight=iron+sigh

im still no big fan of the ironsight, but i get used to it.

in etqw it had a fine balance. i think we will see that balance again in brink.

(figjam) #3

Iron sights just end up turning the game into a corner camping COD fest. I would prefer to see the run and gun feel of ET or RTCW.

Iron sights in ETQW was fair enough coz of the long distances involved but on small maps I really don’t see the point.

(Herandar) #4

Don’t worry, no one expected your dimes.

(Humate) #5

http://www.splashdamage.com/forums/showpost.php?p=274824&postcount=70

(LyndonL) #6

Excuse me how does ironsights make it a corner camping game?

BC2 NEEDS ironsights anywhere past 2 metres and that’s nowhere near corner campish on the servers that I play on, and that’s a way slower game than Brink will be.

Besides you don’t need ironsights for anything other than long distance shooting.

Be off with ye sir trolleth of trollwych.

(tokamak) #7

You already necro’d a beautiful ironsight thread which explored all the facets of the subject.

You didn’t add anything to the discussion then and now you feel it’s appropriate to kick of the discussion for another round yet again without any substantial arguments?

A lock would be appropriate. Deal with the arguments or keep off.

(figjam) #8

I didn’t know about the other thread until Kil888 posted it here.

(Diablo85) #9

As much as I agree with you, times have changed. The gameplay we love is outdated and the new FPS loving crowd wants ironsights. Not adding them in would cost BRINK alot of sales. More then the small ET community can make up for.

(Mustkunstn1k) #10

You can easily play without using ironsights… (and still be effective).

(Schwarzeis) #11

[QUOTE=figjam;274811].

I expect you guys to learn from your mistakes and make this a game for the loyal fans of ET.[/QUOTE]

Figjam, what the ****? :l

(DarkangelUK) #12

Crouch was the iron sight of RtCW and W:ET and it never slowed it down, ETQW had iron sight and it didn’t slow it down, the only reason CoD gets slowed down is because of the massive spread of the weapons when shooting without iron sight. Even with the hip shooter perk, the spread was still large, and since it didn’t take very much bullets to take someone down, you had to make sure your bullets counted so relied on iron sight.

From what I’ve read (and remember), iron sight in Brink will give you accuracy over medium to long distance, anything closer will be fine with hip shooting.

(Mr.Fozzie) #13

Iron sights were not the sole reason call of duty can SOMETIMES be a ‘campy’ game. Saying it always, or even often is, is simply incorrect, especially given the new ridiculous perks (marathon, steady aim, ninja to name a few)

Including iron sights in this game will not miraculously cause it to become ‘campy’ or even necessarily slower. The game clearly emphasizes speed, movement, and a dynamic style of play.

(DarkangelUK) #14

The reliance on iron sights turned it onto a constant run/stop game with no flow, regardless of marathon (which was used for running from one hidey hole to the next) or steady aim (which didn’t reduce the hip fire spread by any significant amount). You can’t sprint while iron sight, and it helps a great deal to get kills… so yes, it is a significant contributory to slowing the pace down. Not the only thing granted, but a major factor in causing you to stop, hide and shoot.

(tokamak) #15

It’s also a great lemming repellent.

(Mr.Fozzie) #16

In gametypes such as search and destroy, i absolutely agree with you. CTF, sabotage, etc… do not suffer from this on such a grand scale, as to detriment the game.

I would argue that a game with no iron sights (counterstrike) is significantly more ‘campy’ than most Call of Duty pubs/matches that i’ve played in, simply because of a game-type design.

Maybe we’ve had different call of duty experiences, but since the days of vcod, my play style has always been very active, and mobile. People who are going to camp, will do so regardless of what player options are available to them. Sure iron sights prevent you from sprinting 24/7, but i hardly believe ET matches were played with a paper-weight over the sprint key either, especially on the defensive side of things.

(MatthiasK75) #17

its not just iron sites that slow CoD down, its a combo of irons increasing accuracy while the hip fire sucks. In Black ops, if someone is using steady aim to help hip fire they generally run around a lot more, almost constantly. I’m not defending CoD (screw that) im defending iron sites, ive read several places that you dont need them and that hip fire in this game is excellent, and iron sites are just there to maybe be increased accuracy over range, or if youre just used to them. But really? iron sites is what ruins a game for you? of all the innovative and forward thinking features, after all the time they spent balance, an all the work to make it be one of the most team based games out there, iron sites break the game?

(Bridger) #18

Because adding 1 feature that other popular games use is selling out!

What the hell is wrong with Iron Sights? I stopped playing CoD after the 2nd one, but I’ve always felt the system really helped solve the “in reality people really can see further than this and be more accurate” problem. Iron sights gives you the best of both FOVs. If you focus on an area you’re going to see more detail there and maybe notice an enemy you otherwise mightn’t have. The trade off is you are less aware of your immediate surroundings and you are going to have to move slower as a result.

What I think you are worried about is that this will create a very slow gameplay style where people are leaning around corners and moving slow all the time to get an accurate shot. Based on the speed and respawn + revive systems in the game (plus gameplay footage) I highly doubt that. It seems to me (based off the footage) that Brink uses Iron Sights as I’ve always expected them to be used: For distance shooting. Close up you can spray from the hip and still hit fine (as well as dodging cause you are faster!).

Iron Sights are only a small feature that reinforces slow-paced games. The other pieces are: slow movement in general, large punishment for dying (1 life to live modes or long respawn time), low hip accuracy, and very fast kills (low health games).

Brink doesn’t have any of those other pieces, and includes a system (SMART) which will make it easier to fire from the hip while dodging in close quarters (love that slide +shotgun to the face).

(tokamak) #19

Quake Wars had ironsights before MW1 became a raging success. Iron Sights have been in shooters for 13 years (Delta Force from 1998 had it) now and they’re here to stay, they’re just offer that much depth to the game.

It doesn’t promote slow-paced gaming, it promotes diverse gaming, having the option to give up your mobility and wide-sights at any time in favour of heightened accuracy forces the player to think more about the way he aproaches the game.

It’s the lack of an ironsight option that forces only one way to play, you always have to keep moving and the game is purely determined by twitch reflexes rather than a combination of cognitive skills, intuition and intricate cerebral thought processes.

I don’t know about you, but I prefer to be able to use my entire brain while gaming. But of course it makes sense that you oppose this form of diversity if you don’t have much going on in the other parts of your head.

(Senyin) #20

[QUOTE=tokamak;274875]Quake Wars had ironsights before MW1 became a raging success. Iron Sights have been in shooters for 13 years (Delta Force from 1998 had it) now and they’re here to stay, they’re just offer that much depth to the game.

It doesn’t promote slow-paced gaming, it promotes diverse gaming, having the option to give up your mobility and wide-sights at any time in favour of heightened accuracy forces the player to think more about the way he aproaches the game.

It’s the lack of an ironsight option that forces only one way to play, you always have to keep moving and the game is purely determined by twitch reflexes rather than a combination of cognitive skills, intuition and intricate cerebral thought processes.

I don’t know about you, but I prefer to be able to use my entire brain while gaming. But of course it makes sense that you oppose this form of diversity if you don’t have much going on in the other parts of your head.[/QUOTE]

I’m really sick of you insulting people who prefer different playstyles than you.
Almost everytime I’m trying to see your POV on e.g. ironsight without judgement, some condescending comments are made by you. You should know your point comes across much better if you take a more adult approach and leave the insults & judgements at the door.

And by the way, stop assuming that everyone plays fast paced or “from the hip” games with a
mindless run and gun attitude.
It’s a flaw on your part believing that is the only way these types of games can be played.