|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Csikszent Mihalyi
DUST University
Ivy League
24
   |
Posted - 2013.08.08 17:56:00 -
[1] - Quote
It doesn't outgun a sniper rifle across the map, it doesn't outgun a shotgun (and barely an SMG) in close distance, it doesn't outgun a grenade launcher when aiming above a wall or from a rooftop, it doesn't outgun a frickin' flaylock when the target is behind cover. It doesn't outgun a forge gun, if the forge gunner gets the first shot in.
The (mouse-based) aiming system and hit detection in this game are not nearly as bad as people make it out to be, but when the game starts lagging (which happens too often), a mass driver easily outguns it.
When you can't aim for ****, the AR is not an effective weapon. People say that point and click is easy, and that's true, but fast and reliable point and click is a different story. The AR is easy to use, but it still scales in effectiveness very linearly with your abilities.
The AR is the allrounder, the most effective weapon at most common ranges, and it will always be like that. The only weapons that the AR has to be directly balanced again is other weapons which aim to fill the same role. I can only really think of the scrambler rifle.
Everything else is a specialised weapon and should be good at what it's supposed to do. But a specialised weapon does not have to outgun or even compete with the AR in general killing potential.
Or another way to look at it is this: If you have a battle between 32 snipers, forge guns, or mass drivers, the gameplay is going to suck (not everyone will agree with this...). A battle between 32 ARs is going to be just fine, whether you find it boring or not. That's why it is the default weapon for most people, and will always be the most common choice.
So no, I can't give you a yes or no answer because you are not asking the right question. |
Csikszent Mihalyi
DUST University
Ivy League
26
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 18:13:00 -
[2] - Quote
Buster Friently wrote:Csikszent Mihalyi wrote:
Or another way to look at it is this: If you have a battle between 32 snipers, forge guns, or mass drivers, the gameplay is going to suck (not everyone will agree with this...). A battle between 32 ARs is going to be just fine, whether you find it boring or not. That's why it is the default weapon for most people, and will always be the most common choice.
So no, I can't give you a yes or no answer because you are not asking the right question.
To me, what you describe as "fine" gameplay is the entire problem. That's the epitome of brainless, no tactics lowbrow FPS. I hope Dust never even comes close to this.
Specialised weapons enrich the game and spice things up. But as a foundation of core gameplay mechanics, they are unsuitable.
If any weapon is so bad that you hardly ever see it on the battlefield, then that's a pity and something to be rectified (hello plasma cannon). But complaining that the AR is the most used and most effective weapon in general is pointless. One weapon has to fill that role, and it better be one that makes for good gameplay. A battle between 32 mass drivers would not be any more tactical than a battle between 32 ARs. It would be a bloody mess. |
Csikszent Mihalyi
DUST University
Ivy League
26
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 18:14:00 -
[3] - Quote
gbghg wrote:I wouldn't say its op, it just lacks any downside unlike pretty much every other weapon in the game which have things quick limit them, overheats, charge up times, visibly giving away your position etc. Give the AR something that limits it like a shorter range or an overheat or a slower rate of fire. Weapons need something to limit them otherwise they become something of a jack of all trades.
But that's the whole point, it's a jack of all trades. Every specialised weapon eclipses it in its own niche. |
|
|
| |
|