Well first of all we have to consider the two types of ADS. The first being one that gives you no advantage or close to no advantage when ADSing in terms of spread and all it does is give you a viewmodel of your sights and a zoomed in field of view as well as slow your movement, similar to Brink. Now I don’t know about most people but I never used ADS even though I think? In Brink it gave you an advantage? IDK. Fact is all it is doing is zooming in and obscuring your view. Unless you are playing on some huge map and trying to use a medium range weapon at long range for whatever reason this would not help you at all in fact even then the slower movement will just make your easier to hit. So lets say you are trying to be a good player the first thing you will hear is don’t use ADS and aim using your crosshair since that gives you better movement and aim control. You can say “okay but this feature doesn’t really hurt new players so why bother just not having it” well if all good players don’t use it than what is the point, might as well have new players learn to aim without it from the start. Like I said, training wheels (note that QW:ET probably had this because the maps were so damn big that it was the best way to aim at an enemy that you could otherwise not see long range). The second type of ADS is the one that actually negatively effects shooting skill and movement skill by forcing people to press a button to aim unless they want to have a lucky 1/100 shot at killing like you see in CoD noscope montages and whatever. This basically directly nerfs movement and makes aiming less skilful, but most importantly slows down gameplay considerably which is not ok for a fast paced objective game such as one from the ET series. It’s okay for casual/realism/“movie realism” shooters but not okay for the next sequel to this series of games. The worst part of this ADS system by far is the way you engage an enemy. Standing still and aiming down sights gives you the most advantage, so if you do that you are guaranteed to be able to take down good players who in order to kill you without flanking you would have to go into your field of view and either stand still then zoom in and shoot, or spray and hope for that 1/100 shot which happens and is not okay for a skill-based and competitive shooter (in CoD and similar games most kills happen from enemies you have not seen until they actually start firing on you, either by camping flanking or spawning behind). Note that CS is similar to this in how you have to stand still for accurate shots, but the most important part is you still have your movement to make shots seem like you fire while moving if you are good enough or to juke, and there is no bullet cone but a bullet pattern, which you can abuse in order to land amazing shots. If Dirty Bomb is to be a slow paced shooter than it might as well try to be CS, not another CoD clone.
No Ironsight
It’s all about finding a good balance. Of course you shouldn’t have to ADS to hit someone two meters away from you, but at the same time, rewarding someone for knowing when and where to ADS adds a great deal of depth to a game. I’m not going to categorise various implementations of ADS as we don’t seem to be on the same page there. I wouldn’t agree that Brink’s ADS has a negligible beneficial impact for example.
In terms of accuracy, yes it does, however by choosing to stand still rather than keep on the move, you have just painted a massive bullseye on your forehead.“Shoot/nade me please” :). You should not be standing still in an FPS, regardless of whether the game includes ADS or not (unless you’re doing your damnedest to hit from a huge distance).
Knowing when and where to ADS is massively important. As you have said yourself, there are both pros and cons to ADSing, you don’t want to get caught looking the wrong way aiming down your sight, but equally you don’t want the :stroggtapir: on the other team to get the drop on you and have your head squarely in his sights. Whether or not you ADS or shoot from the hip is often a split second judgement call, a call that knowledgeable and experienced players will get right more often than not. Including ADS increases the number of variables to account for mid-game, which in turn provides players with even more room to demonstrate their prowess over their friends and enemies. I’m all for allowing good players to excel in new and different ways :infiltrator:.
Rewarding skill is terrific. Massively high skill ceilings are fantastic, however tactics are just as important. By rewarding highly skilled players, as well as those who show terrific tactical knowhow, you’re creating a game that’s much more dynamic, and for me at least, interesting to play.
so if you do that you are guaranteed to be able to take down good players who in order to kill you without flanking you would have to go into your field of view and either stand still then zoom in and shoot, or spray and hope for that 1/100 shot which happens and is not okay for a skill-based and competitive shooter
Tactics my friend. If you’re going to run straight at someone who’s already pointing their gun in your direction, you’re going to have a bad time. If they’re camping like that, toss a 'nade their way or flank them and relieve them of their innards/tags :P.
Sure, adding ADS functionality to a game has the potential to take some of the pace off of it, however when done well, the difference should be negligible. The benefits that you receive in terms of a greater depth of gameplay with more options available to you makes for a massive improvement to the overall experience.
Now, time to go back and pray to the almighty gaming god of Balance. Ciao!
But there should NEVER not be a time to not ADS, it’s stupid to say that instead of taking that 1 second time to “zoom in” you should roll a die instead because you have a greater chance of killing the enemy before he kills you if you let random spread decide the outcome, but that’s what it comes to with casual games where skill plays little part in.
YOU SHOULD be standing still in an FPS that has the “depth” that you call it of CoD. There is never a time where you will miss because it’s always going to be incredibly easy to hit you so moving around only makes it harder for YOU to shoot, unless you are using a controller or aiming your mouse with your chin or feet or something.
[QUOTE=Christophicus;413635]
Knowing when and where to ADS is massively important. As you have said yourself, there are both pros and cons to ADSing[/QUOTE]
It’s really not. It’s either you rely on luck with spraying or you rely on your enemy not getting lucky with his and ADS in when he could kill you, or you camp with your sights on where he will be. This DOES NOT add depth to a shooter, it removes it. It casualizes and removes movement and having outcomes of fights depending on shooting skill.
[QUOTE=Christophicus;413635]
Rewarding skill is terrific. Massively high skill ceilings are fantastic, however tactics are just as important. By rewarding highly skilled players, as well as those who show terrific tactical knowhow, you’re creating a game that’s much more dynamic, and for me at least, interesting to play.[/QUOTE]
ADS only gives you the perception of tactics when it’s all based on luck. You’re only rewarding making good decisions by having a greater chance to kill your enemy before he kills you, and camping around an area is the best way to achieve this. ADS does nothing for the tactics that are already in every shooter, as in playing as a team, playing the objective, map knowledge, gamesense, etc. It only removes skill and gives you the perception of rewarding gameplay through “ADS tactics”.
[QUOTE=Christophicus;413635]
Sure, adding ADS functionality to a game has the potential to take some of the pace off of it, however when done well, the difference should be negligible. The benefits that you receive in terms of a greater depth of gameplay with more options available to you makes for a massive improvement to the overall experience.[/QUOTE]
Once again, does not add depth or has any potental for rewarding skill or tactics. The difference between the movement and skill ceiling in an ADS shooter and something like CS or ET games is huge. I’m sure anybody who is experienced in both can attest to that.
Of course there are going to be situations in which you don’t have time to ADS, or you feel that you’re close enough that doing so will only waste time. That happens a lot. 1 second is an awful long time when someone’s pointing their rifle in your face, it does make a great deal of difference.
As for standing still; that should be done only when firing (and ideally crouching if possible). The general point I made there was that standing still and waiting(some may like to call it camping :P) will get your killed.
There’s no doubt that when a cone of fire is involved, a game becomes less of an exact science. It throws up unscripted, unexpected, situations every now and then that shake things up just for a moment. For many, that creates an “oh poop!” moment that is a joy and thrill to overcome. It’s a break from the norm. Granted; it can be frustrating too, especially if there’s money riding on it, but more often than not the better player will come out on top in those situations.
It seems like the core principals of what you and I are looking for in this title are at odds. While I am looking for a competitive title that allows a player’s skill and tactical prowess to shine through, I am willing to compromise in terms of the maximum skill ceiling for an overall more enjoyable experience. I say this as someone who has taken part in their fair share of tournaments and leagues too, it’s not that I have no love for eSports. With that said, I’m not looking for this game to be another CS, I’m not looking for it to draw the top prize pots in FPS eSports outside of publisher sponsored events. It seems as though you’re looking for the maximum skill ceiling possible. I find that notion rather dry and far too rigid. I like something with a bit more variation to it.
It’s most certainly possible to maintain a fun competitive environment in titles that include a cone of fire and ADS. Competitive play may not quite reach the same levels as that of a CS title, but it’ll cater to a different crowd who’ll have a tonne of fun playing the game :).
It’s possible to do a lot more than that, COD4 is 2nd only to CS as the most “serious” and competitive team FPS ever, having featured at many big money events in it’s day.
I’d imagine the “pro” gamers at www.tek-9.org and www.cadred.org would have a right laugh reading this thread. 
[QUOTE=Kendle;413752]It’s possible to do a lot more than that, COD4 is 2nd only to CS as the most “serious” and competitive team FPS ever, having featured at many big money events in it’s day.
I’d imagine the “pro” gamers at www.tek-9.org and www.cadred.org would have a right laugh reading this thread. ;)[/QUOTE]
Popularity and quality are quite different things. Watch any top CoD 4 match and compare that to any high level Quake vid - the skills displayed in the latter will be in a different league. CoD simply has a much larger player base to draw on. Ironically, this is because it’s such a casual, non serious fps designed to be accessible to all.
Note I’m not saying these guys aren’t skilled btw - I’m sure they could bend me over a barrel in any game!
Indeed, I had a blast playing CoD4 competitively, but even bearing its relative success in mind, the prize pots weren’t anywhere near CS’s unfortunately :(.
I’d imagine the “pro” gamers at www.tek-9.org and www.cadred.org would have a right laugh reading this thread.
Heheh, there’s no doubt about that :D. I’ve got to tip my hat to some of the Cadred contributors though, they can be quite open minded at times.
They’ll certainly be of a different “type”. Comparing Quake and COD4 is like comparing apples and oranges, one is a duelling game majoring on twitch aiming skills and map control, the other is all about team co-ordination.
Assuming DirtyBomb is going to be a team game, assuming it’s going to be class-based (we don’t actually know either), and even further assuming it’ll have some kind of “objective” style of game play, which out of Quake and COD4 are the most transferable and relevant skills? I think you know the answer 
I meant in terms how suited these games are to competitive play. If comparing like for like, RTCW and ET would work better. I’d argue both are more demanding teamplay wise than CS or CoD4 and are certainly on a different level shooting and movement wise. What bugs me most about CoD is how easy it is to kill and how spammy the guns are. Entire matches decided because someone decided to look right rather than left and got hit by a few bullets to the leg.
Quake CTF was really team-based and competitive. Can’t forget Quake Fortress either http://youtu.be/N50_hVRSt38
I’m okay with iron sights as long as it’s nothing like COD. I want Dirty Bomb to be similar to ET in the sense where we have a good strafe and accurate weapons. Shooting from the hip should be the best method of getting kills for all ranges except for the extreme ones.
+1 for no iron sights or not being necessary for accuracy (people who want to use them can, but there is no real advantage).
+1 no iron sights, or just use them for zooming on long range targets. No effect on accuracy ptherwise
Looking at the gameplay video the hip fire is pretty good and you’ll only need to IS for very long ranges. In RtCW + WET it was crouch; it’s the same thing quit whining.
It’s not. Ironsight still limits your view. That’s a huge downside compared to crouching.
Also, the ironsighting animation takes longer than just crouching. At the top level, I can see this being a hindrance.
Anyways, I think the ET:QW model for ironsighting is the best way to go. I would still prefer to not have them at all, but I guess that’s just not a realistic expectation.
I’m not a fan of IS either, but as you can see it’s already implemented into the game and they are not going to remove it. There really is no point debating whether it should be in or out.
I was a top player in RtCW and you only needed to crouch for very long shots (beach, assault) other than that you sprint strafed and popped the melon.
Unless they plan on making the scope in time more than .2 seconds there will be no difference from crouch and IS except for that fact that you move slower when crouched and have less angular view (top down and vice versa). I will give you the peripherals being blocked a bit, but the maps will be linear so it shouldn’t be too bad. It’s also your responsibility to have map awareness and not make yourself vulnerable.
The one thing I ask is for the IS to be a 1:1 sensitivity ratio compared to the hipfire. Do not make it .5 it’s terrible.
There were no ironsights in the gameplay video. I really hope that the reason for that is that there won’t be in the game (and not because they haven’t created the animations yet or something).
No ironsights would be so sweet.
Edit: Nope, I was wrong, there was like 2 seconds of one dude using iron sights.
That’s sad. I know they want the cowadooty audience, but ironsights are just so pointless. I think it’s even worse if they are there just for no reason and only slightly improve the gun handling. Because right now they seem pretty pointless since most of the gameplay video showed people playing without them.