when will the optics is coming?


(GatoCommodore) #1

maybe i was hallucinating but i do remember the devs were talking about weapon customization or optics
when is it coming?


(Ptiloui) #2

I think with 1.0 release or after. Even if we don’t know how the future loadout system will work, I presume attachments will come with it.


(Diosito) #3

Soon™ !!!

Abbadon

Abaddon


(Your worst knifemare.) #4

Hopefully never.


(Xerny) #5

@Lord_Coctus said:
Hopefully never.

Why not? I always had problems using the Fel-IX or the PDP with my Aimee due to the weird sights (i don’t know why i have that problem.), i’ve always found the MOA optic to be much more comfortable to use.

Plus we could even add sights to the Grandeur and make it stand out along the other sniper rifles.

Also who knows! The Devs might also add new sights to customize the weapons!


([ *O.C.B.* ] Wildcard) #6

@Lord_Coctus said:
Hopefully never.

As much as I like customization in games this sorta thing will just create more basis for people to bitch and complain, using Pay to Win (P2W) as their argument; customized optics creates an issue as it can be used to change the sights of a gun with horrible default sights, or generally agreed upon as awful anyways, giving a clear edge over someone without access to the attachment. The only way it would work would be if they were all offered up-front for free to all players, but SD won’t make money off that and they are running a business after all; don’t even get me started on the idea of Silencers though as all it would do is create the same issue but while having a greater impact on balancing.

Essentially it would make the situation for those without the attachment be akin to someone who mains Proxy in a high-end competitive setting; where they have to already largely out-skill the enemy players to be remotely on par with any other Engineer doing the same job, and even then is only viable on certain maps or sections of maps. I’ve already made posted replies before, that border on being a lecture/essay, about this specific topic before; specifically explaining why she’s considered to be arguably the weakest of the four (4) existing Engineers by the competitive scene (in its golden age to what remains of it in the present), so I’ll spare you a repeat of that long-winded explanation and leave it at this.

Ultimately I have to agree that I hope it is never a thing, due to how many problems it will introduce to an already bug-ridden game; especially when you consider how long it has taken SD to address certain long-standing bugs and glitches, several of which are still running rampant in the game to this day, I don’t even want to think of the horrid balancing implications this would bring.


(STARRYSOCK) #7

Adding in weapon customization would hurt the game’s sense of simplicity too. Part of the thing I like about DB is that it’s easy to remember the damage of the gun, how good it is at range, how hard it is to control, exactly what it sounds like, etc.
Weapon customization wouldn’t even add anything to the game either, it’s just a feature for the sake of a feature. All it would do is bring imbalance and unnecessary complications.


(GatoCommodore) #8

Imo SD dont even have to design many kind of optics

probably have the same zoom as iron sight but its higher placement than the gun which means more visibility when you aim at longer range with weapons such as BR or Grandeur

Optics might be pay 2 win on games like R6 Siege but in DB?
hell nah


(BeeboTheCuddly) #9

No attachments is a charm of the game for me


(LifeupOmega) #10

I don’t think they will, nor do I think they’re even needed. SD already struggle to balance weapons.


(Begin2018) #11

Usually attachments are to build a class, this is nonsense in DB as class are defined by mercenaries.


(WatchAsILead) #12

Adding attachments wont break the game, calm down. Its a nice little bonus and it wont hurt your precious game.


(STARRYSOCK) #13

@WatchAsILead said:
Adding attachments wont break the game, calm down. Its a nice little bonus and it wont hurt your precious game.

But like… why would you want it though? It’s not like it would add anything to the game.
There are a lot of great points against them that have been brought up here, but I haven’t seen a reason for attachments besides “features for the sake of features”

This is a forum, and I’d actually love to hear some argument as to why they’d be a nice addition and a good use of dev time. It’s better than “calm down, deal with it”


(GatoCommodore) #14

@STARRYSOCK said:

@WatchAsILead said:
Adding attachments wont break the game, calm down. Its a nice little bonus and it wont hurt your precious game.

But like… why would you want it though? It’s not like it would add anything to the game.
There are a lot of great points against them that have been brought up here, but I haven’t seen a reason for attachments besides “features for the sake of features”

This is a forum, and I’d actually love to hear some argument as to why they’d be a nice addition and a good use of dev time. It’s better than “calm down, deal with it”

well for starters fixing certain guns like Grandeur to be more viable at longer ranges without having half of the screen being covered by the gun


(Chris Mullins) #15

I poked the devs and although some work has been done on the system it’s not a part of our strategy for the 1.0 release.


(WatchAsILead) #16

@STARRYSOCK said:

@WatchAsILead said:
Adding attachments wont break the game, calm down. Its a nice little bonus and it wont hurt your precious game.

But like… why would you want it though? It’s not like it would add anything to the game.
There are a lot of great points against them that have been brought up here, but I haven’t seen a reason for attachments besides “features for the sake of features”

This is a forum, and I’d actually love to hear some argument as to why they’d be a nice addition and a good use of dev time. It’s better than “calm down, deal with it”

The thing is you already know why some people would want optics and I didnt think an explanation was necessary. But if you insist there is an obvious advantage to using an optic let alone different optics. Some of the iron sights suck, some people dont like specific iron sights, some people like to try different optics to see what works best for them, some people want to customize for the sake of customizing, some people want more than 1 option.

The reason why you arent hearing arguments for them is because its painfully obvious why some people would want them. If its a feature people like then its a good use of dev time, and if you dont like them just simply dont use them. And I say “calm down, deal with it” because you can completely ignore scopes if you dont want to use them. So easy to explain Idk why I even bothered explaining.


(STARRYSOCK) #17

@WatchAsILead said:

@STARRYSOCK said:

@WatchAsILead said:
Adding attachments wont break the game, calm down. Its a nice little bonus and it wont hurt your precious game.

But like… why would you want it though? It’s not like it would add anything to the game.
There are a lot of great points against them that have been brought up here, but I haven’t seen a reason for attachments besides “features for the sake of features”

This is a forum, and I’d actually love to hear some argument as to why they’d be a nice addition and a good use of dev time. It’s better than “calm down, deal with it”

The thing is you already know why some people would want optics and I didnt think an explanation was necessary. But if you insist there is an obvious advantage to using an optic let alone different optics. Some of the iron sights suck, some people dont like specific iron sights, some people like to try different optics to see what works best for them, some people want to customize for the sake of customizing, some people want more than 1 option.

The reason why you arent hearing arguments for them is because its painfully obvious why some people would want them. If its a feature people like then its a good use of dev time, and if you dont like them just simply dont use them. And I say “calm down, deal with it” because you can completely ignore scopes if you dont want to use them. So easy to explain Idk why I even bothered explaining.

Cosmetic attachments are fine, but it’s not what I’m talking about. It’s things that actually affect gun performance, like silencers, extended mags, muzzle breaks, and even optics. Crappy ironsights on things like the grandeur ( @GatoCommodore ) help keep those guns balanced. You can have a gun with bad ironsights so long as its good elsewhere, which a lot of those weapons for the most part are. And you can also have decent optics on an otherwise crappy gun to help keep it balanced with other weapons, like the blish for instance.

My point is, DB’s weapons are balanced for the most part around the fact that some of them have crappy optics, and some have great optics. The grandeur is still viable even with bad ironsights because it’s good in other categories. The blishlok is still a viable SMG because its red dot sight allows it to be useful at long range, where other SMGs suffer.
I’m just not sure why you’d want to change up DB’s balance in that regard when most people seem to think those weapons are more or less fine as they are.


([ *O.C.B.* ] Wildcard) #18

@STARRYSOCK said:

@WatchAsILead said:

@STARRYSOCK said:

@WatchAsILead said:
Adding attachments wont break the game, calm down. Its a nice little bonus and it wont hurt your precious game.

But like… why would you want it though? It’s not like it would add anything to the game.
There are a lot of great points against them that have been brought up here, but I haven’t seen a reason for attachments besides “features for the sake of features”

This is a forum, and I’d actually love to hear some argument as to why they’d be a nice addition and a good use of dev time. It’s better than “calm down, deal with it”

The thing is you already know why some people would want optics and I didnt think an explanation was necessary. But if you insist there is an obvious advantage to using an optic let alone different optics. Some of the iron sights suck, some people dont like specific iron sights, some people like to try different optics to see what works best for them, some people want to customize for the sake of customizing, some people want more than 1 option.

The reason why you arent hearing arguments for them is because its painfully obvious why some people would want them. If its a feature people like then its a good use of dev time, and if you dont like them just simply dont use them. And I say “calm down, deal with it” because you can completely ignore scopes if you dont want to use them. So easy to explain Idk why I even bothered explaining.

Cosmetic attachments are fine, but it’s not what I’m talking about. It’s things that actually affect gun performance, like silencers, extended mags, muzzle breaks, and even optics. Crappy ironsights on things like the grandeur ( @GatoCommodore ) help keep those guns balanced. You can have a gun with bad ironsights so long as its good elsewhere, which a lot of those weapons for the most part are. And you can also have decent optics on an otherwise crappy gun to help keep it balanced with other weapons, like the blish for instance.

My point is, DB’s weapons are balanced for the most part around the fact that some of them have crappy optics, and some have great optics. The grandeur is still viable even with bad ironsights because it’s good in other categories. The blishlok is still a viable SMG because its red dot sight allows it to be useful at long range, where other SMGs suffer.
I’m just not sure why you’d want to change up DB’s balance in that regard when most people seem to think those weapons are more or less fine as they are.

Not to mention, such as with the Grandeur for instance, you get used to it eventually. Besides you should never be hard-scoping on the Grandeur for extended periods of time to begin with; it handles in a way closer to the Dreiss AR, in that you fire the first shot from the hip then Aim-down-sights (aka A.D.S.) the remaining shots in quick succession. Its not a bad gun, per say, it just handles differently from any other gun in its category; which isn’t inherently bad, just different.


(Freezer_Boss) #19

Why add optics in a hip-fire based FPS ?


(Xerny) #20

@Freezer_Boss said:
Why add optics in a hip-fire based FPS ?

Remember the point of iron sights, it’s pointless to use it unless you’re at a far distance, some sights for guns such as the Grandeur are kinda crappy to use.

Optics could be orientated more for snipers rather than close to mid range mercs, plus optics won’t be the only things that might come, maybe we could get silencers or even extended magazines.