DUST Search - The Problem with Closed Beta Sights

All Channels

General Discussions

The Problem with Closed Beta Sights

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Aeon Amadi Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 5423	Posted - 2014.04.04 05:35:00 - [1] - Quote Those of us that were around back in the day remember that the Assault Rifles had Camera Sights and after some feedback was given, these sights were removed in favor of Iron Sights. Now, some of us genuinely didn't like aiming through the camera sights and may have preferred legitimate iron sights but there were a great many of us that initially enjoyed the immersion offered by the camera sights as it put is in place of the clone soldier we were playing. However, after a moment of retrospect I remember very distinctly why the sights back then felt so... off. It wasn't solely due to the fact that they were, after all, camera sights - but more so because at the time, whether intentional or not, there was the slight issue of aiming. Now, bear with me for a moment because this was almost two years ago so my memory might be a bit fuzzy but as I recall the issue I personally had is that the player's camera would actually move down to the sights when aiming, rather than the gun moving to the player's camera. There are a few instances of FPS games doing both, with more modern FPS games like Call of Duty and Battlefield moving the gun to the camera to facilitate better precision when directing aim at the target from the hip. A perfect example of the camera moving to the sight, today, would be 7 Days to Die in which if you aim down the sights fast enough you can actually see the camera (on the gun) being pulled from the holster on the hip; which is quite disorienting. Combine this with the initial issue of players sometimes finding it hard to voice their opinions with the right wording and the expression comes off as "I hate the sights", rather than "I hate the camera moving to the sights". Thereby, the opinion of the community is taken into account and a change is made based on what is being said. Leaving us with the iron-sights we see on the rifles today. From an immersion stand-point, it doesn't really make much sense at all. - More than 23,000 years have passed in New Eden, yet no militaristic advancement has been made beyond picatinny rails and modern iron sights. - The helmets used by the clone mercenaries are not designed to facilitate physically aiming down the sights. - The advantages of having a camera on the gun are enormous and have been utilized by real-life modern military for those benefits. So, on a lore-standpoint, it makes more sense to have the camera sights than not... but, ultimately, I feel it shouldn't interfere with the game itself - rather, it should be an option that is provided at the player's discretion based on their personal preference. Just my thoughts on the matter. Useful Links //forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=133588 //forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=134182
Cat Merc Ahrendee Mercenaries Dirt Nap Squad. 8049	Posted - 2014.04.04 05:41:00 - [2] - Quote I want my four eyes to have a use dammit! My intentions is to have a fun game for everyone. If I seem to be biased, I have good hard data to back it up.
Aeon Amadi Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 5424	Posted - 2014.04.04 05:42:00 - [3] - Quote Cat Merc wrote: I want my four eyes to have a use dammit! Players having built-in binoculars would totally be something I'd love to see implemented Useful Links //forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=133588 //forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=134182
medomai grey WarRavens League of Infamy 509	Posted - 2014.04.04 05:43:00 - [4] - Quote Lore that makes logical sense?! It's a witch! Burn it! Ever wonder how nanohive's nanites magically become the munitions for your weapons; nanites becoming plasma, gunpowder, battery fluid? The only way this is possible is if nano-hives stores these materials or alchemy. And nanohives don't look like they could store the required energy for alchemy. I've been told that people prefer fake smiles over the honest expressions of their fellow men. : )
Aeon Amadi Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 5424	Posted - 2014.04.04 05:46:00 - [5] - Quote medomai grey wrote: Lore that makes logical sense?! It's a witch! Burn it! Ever wonder how nanohive's nanites magically become the munitions for your weapons; nanites becoming plasma, gunpowder, battery fluid? The only way this is possible is if nano-hives stores these materials or alchemy. And nanohives don't look like they could store the required energy for alchemy. /Shrug Mass Effect 1 explained it as having a "magazine" which was really just a big block of metal that was fed into the gun and had shavings fired out as fletchettes through a rail-way, thus eliminating the need to reload. With the exception of explosives and lasers, I could see this being a suitable explanation in Eve Online. All in all, the explanation doesn't really need to make sense as Eve Online developers have already admitted that they don't operate on Newtonian Physics. Practicality, however... is a completely different story... Useful Links //forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=133588 //forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=134182
Kara Anschel Tech Guard RISE of LEGION 103	Posted - 2014.04.04 05:53:00 - [6] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: /Shrug Mass Effect 1 explained it as having a "magazine" which was really just a big block of metal that was fed into the gun and had shavings fired out as fletchettes through a rail-way, thus eliminating the need to reload. With the exception of explosives and lasers, I could see this being a suitable explanation in Eve Online. All in all, the explanation doesn't really need to make sense as Eve Online developers have already admitted that they don't operate on Newtonian Physics. Practicality, however... is a completely different story... Except, in Mass Effect they just shot bullets at each other. Not traditional rifle rounds, rail slugs, laser charges, motherfucking plasma, grenade shells, etc. etc. So no, that explanation wouldn't make sense.
Cat Merc Ahrendee Mercenaries Dirt Nap Squad. 8052	Posted - 2014.04.04 06:00:00 - [7] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: medomai grey wrote: Lore that makes logical sense?! It's a witch! Burn it! Ever wonder how nanohive's nanites magically become the munitions for your weapons; nanites becoming plasma, gunpowder, battery fluid? The only way this is possible is if nano-hives stores these materials or alchemy. And nanohives don't look like they could store the required energy for alchemy. /Shrug Mass Effect 1 explained it as having a "magazine" which was really just a big block of metal that was fed into the gun and had shavings fired out as fletchettes through a rail-way, thus eliminating the need to reload. With the exception of explosives and lasers, I could see this being a suitable explanation in Eve Online. All in all, the explanation doesn't really need to make sense as Eve Online developers have already admitted that they don't operate on Newtonian Physics. Practicality, however... is a completely different story... Yeah, it doesn't really fit when we're firing plasma, lasers, etc'. In ME it's just bullets and sometimes lasers. My intentions is to have a fun game for everyone. If I seem to be biased, I have good hard data to back it up.
Aeon Amadi Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 5425	Posted - 2014.04.04 06:02:00 - [8] - Quote Kara Anschel wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: /Shrug Mass Effect 1 explained it as having a "magazine" which was really just a big block of metal that was fed into the gun and had shavings fired out as fletchettes through a rail-way, thus eliminating the need to reload. With the exception of explosives and lasers, I could see this being a suitable explanation in Eve Online. All in all, the explanation doesn't really need to make sense as Eve Online developers have already admitted that they don't operate on Newtonian Physics. Practicality, however... is a completely different story... Except, in Mass Effect they just shot bullets at each other. Not traditional rifle rounds, rail slugs, laser charges, motherfucking plasma, grenade shells, etc. etc. So no, that explanation wouldn't make sense. If they wanted to explain it that way, they totally could. Makes more sense than manufacturing lead rounds in a factory by default 23,000 years into the future. It's nanites. There's not exactly a handbook on what nanites are capable of and considering that, by definition, the explanation for Mass Effect's weaponry explains -rail slugs almost to the letter- I think it's a pretty bullshit argument to completely discount the realm of possibility considering railguns fire projectiles that do not contain explosives or propellants. All in all, it's Eve Online/Dust 514's creative license. Far as I'm concerned they can explain it with black magic, witchcraft and voodoo and I wouldn't complain as long as it was practical. Useful Links //forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=133588 //forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=134182
Cat Merc Ahrendee Mercenaries Dirt Nap Squad. 8052	Posted - 2014.04.04 06:03:00 - [9] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: Kara Anschel wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: /Shrug Mass Effect 1 explained it as having a "magazine" which was really just a big block of metal that was fed into the gun and had shavings fired out as fletchettes through a rail-way, thus eliminating the need to reload. With the exception of explosives and lasers, I could see this being a suitable explanation in Eve Online. All in all, the explanation doesn't really need to make sense as Eve Online developers have already admitted that they don't operate on Newtonian Physics. Practicality, however... is a completely different story... Except, in Mass Effect they just shot bullets at each other. Not traditional rifle rounds, rail slugs, laser charges, motherfucking plasma, grenade shells, etc. etc. So no, that explanation wouldn't make sense. If they wanted to explain it that way, they totally could. Makes more sense than manufacturing lead rounds in a factory by default 23,000 years into the future. It's nanites. There's not exactly a handbook on what nanites are capable of and considering that, by definition, the explanation for Mass Effect's weaponry explains -rail slugs almost to the letter- I think it's a pretty bullshit argument to completely discount the realm of possibility considering railguns fire projectiles that do not contain explosives or propellants. All in all, it's Eve Online/Dust 514's creative license. Far as I'm concerned they can explain it with black magic, witchcraft and voodoo and I wouldn't complain as long as it was practical. Nanites are magical. End of story. My intentions is to have a fun game for everyone. If I seem to be biased, I have good hard data to back it up.
Aeon Amadi Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 5425	Posted - 2014.04.04 06:07:00 - [10] - Quote Cat Merc wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: Kara Anschel wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: /Shrug Mass Effect 1 explained it as having a "magazine" which was really just a big block of metal that was fed into the gun and had shavings fired out as fletchettes through a rail-way, thus eliminating the need to reload. With the exception of explosives and lasers, I could see this being a suitable explanation in Eve Online. All in all, the explanation doesn't really need to make sense as Eve Online developers have already admitted that they don't operate on Newtonian Physics. Practicality, however... is a completely different story... Except, in Mass Effect they just shot bullets at each other. Not traditional rifle rounds, rail slugs, laser charges, motherfucking plasma, grenade shells, etc. etc. So no, that explanation wouldn't make sense. If they wanted to explain it that way, they totally could. Makes more sense than manufacturing lead rounds in a factory by default 23,000 years into the future. It's nanites. There's not exactly a handbook on what nanites are capable of and considering that, by definition, the explanation for Mass Effect's weaponry explains -rail slugs almost to the letter- I think it's a pretty bullshit argument to completely discount the realm of possibility considering railguns fire projectiles that do not contain explosives or propellants. All in all, it's Eve Online/Dust 514's creative license. Far as I'm concerned they can explain it with black magic, witchcraft and voodoo and I wouldn't complain as long as it was practical. Nanites are magical. End of story. Now the real argument: How projectile weaponry like the Combat Rifle and SMG firing projectile rounds can do so much damage to crystalline carbonide armor plating made from cobalt/cadmium/silicates/hydrocarbons. Useful Links //forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=133588 //forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=134182

noobsniper the 2nd Inner.Hell 379	Posted - 2014.04.04 06:10:00 - [11] - Quote Oh how I miss that hud :/ "things are made of stuff"-Bill Nye MAG vet raven ftw Pre 1.8 scout don't throw me in with that rift raft
Ivar Iosef G I A N T General Tso's Alliance 84	Posted - 2014.04.04 06:50:00 - [12] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: Now the real argument: How projectile weaponry like the Combat Rifle and SMG firing projectile rounds can do so much damage to crystalline carbonide armor plating made from cobalt/cadmium/silicates/hydrocarbons. That crystalline carbonide armor plating you're talking about is STARSHIP armour.....your pitiful infantry weapons won't even scratch that. Idiocy makes my trigger finger itch. [GI4NT] <3XXXD>
boba's fetta Dead Man's Game 501	Posted - 2014.04.04 06:54:00 - [13] - Quote clearly none of you have watched star trek voager. you should if only for 7of9 and the explanation on nanite's. ccp you broke the forge. skills are not being applied till 30 secs after spawn fixes before nerfs thank you.
Arx Ardashir Imperium Aeternum 734	Posted - 2014.04.04 07:03:00 - [14] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: A perfect example of the camera moving to the sight, today, would be 7 Days to Die in which if you aim down the sights fast enough you can actually see the camera (on the gun) being pulled from the holster on the hip; which is quite disorienting. + 1 for 7DtD reference. Was quite fun in the initial nights, kinda boring once you've got the hang of everything. But it's in alpha, so shrug. Looking forward to the next update. Also, OP, I think the camera should definitely move to the gun if you're using a camera sight, unless your merc holds the weapon to the middle of their face. If weapon attachments ever become a thing, camera sights should be an option and if people don't like them, then they don't have to use them. Anyhoo, why do people keep saying nanites can't become plasma? Plasma is a state of matter, not an element. Nanites turn into pellets, get superheated into a gas/plasma, then get fired out. End of story. And nanites could certainly become rail slugs, seeing as how they're just magnetic lumps of metal. The others (projectiles and laser batteries) require a bit more explanation, but as Cat Merc said, yes, nanites are basically SciFi magic, because the possibilities for them seem endless to us at the moment. Amarr Master - All Amarr Dropsuits at lvl 5. Ghosts Chance's hero for 3/1/14. A manu dei et tet rimon.
Lynn Beck Wake N' Bake Inc Top Men. 1007	Posted - 2014.04.04 07:04:00 - [15] - Quote Just a thought, but what if the magazine for the AR was a solid block of Magnesium or something inside a steel case, an when placed inside the gun, it turns that Magnesium into gas, then charge it in that thing they call a Cyclotron? I refuse to gve honor to your 'god' so therefore i dual tank. Also i feel itchy. Anybody got a tube of Rust-It?
ANON Cerberus Tiny Toons 462	Posted - 2014.04.04 07:10:00 - [16] - Quote I understand that work would be involved on CCP`s part to make this happen but to be honest - Why the hell do we not have customisation for our guns!? I dont expect battlefield or COD levels of gun tweak, sights, silencers etc.. however a few scopes to chose from would be a much needed start! Like you said, most of the merc helmets must be totally enclosed virtual displays. Also just the thought of using iron sights in the far future with the tech that is available in eve just doesn't make any sense at all.
Aeon Amadi Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 5428	Posted - 2014.04.04 07:12:00 - [17] - Quote Lynn Beck wrote: Just a thought, but what if the magazine for the AR was a solid block of Magnesium or something inside a steel case, an when placed inside the gun, it turns that Magnesium into gas, then charge it in that thing they call a Cyclotron? According to the lore, blaster weaponry is still a projectile with a minute amount of 'plasma' charge encased in said projectile. "Particle blasters operate on a similar principle as the railgun except they fire a magnetically contained ball of subatomic particles. " Ammunition: "Consists of two components: a shell of titanium and a core of antimatter atoms suspended in plasma state. Railguns launch the shell directly, while particle blasters pump the plasma into a cyclotron and process the plasma into a bolt that is then fired." That's the description for Anti-matter charges, although the rest are just copy/paste with the 'plasma charge' being changed out ranging from stuff like Iron/Lead to Uranium/Antimatter. More on that here: https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Item_Database:Ammunition_&_Charges:Hybrid_Charges:Standard_Charges:Small Useful Links //forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=133588 //forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=134182
Arx Ardashir Imperium Aeternum 736	Posted - 2014.04.04 07:25:00 - [18] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: Lynn Beck wrote: Just a thought, but what if the magazine for the AR was a solid block of Magnesium or something inside a steel case, an when placed inside the gun, it turns that Magnesium into gas, then charge it in that thing they call a Cyclotron? According to the lore, blaster weaponry is still a projectile with a minute amount of 'plasma' charge encased in said projectile. "Particle blasters operate on a similar principle as the railgun except they fire a magnetically contained ball of subatomic particles. " Ammunition: "Consists of two components: a shell of titanium and a core of antimatter atoms suspended in plasma state. Railguns launch the shell directly, while particle blasters pump the plasma into a cyclotron and process the plasma into a bolt that is then fired." That's the description for Anti-matter charges, although the rest are just copy/paste with the 'plasma charge' being changed out ranging from stuff like Iron/Lead to Uranium/Antimatter. More on that here: https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Item_Database:Ammunition_&_Charges:Hybrid_Charges:Standard_Charges:Small Every description I read there just reinforces what I thought before, that blasters discard the shell and pump up/stimulate the plasma and fire it directly. So a blaster's entire "projectile" is a mass of plasma. Amarr Master - All Amarr Dropsuits at lvl 5. Ghosts Chance's hero for 3/1/14. A manu dei et tet rimon.
Arx Ardashir Imperium Aeternum 736	Posted - 2014.04.04 07:34:00 - [19] - Quote Double posted. Amarr Master - All Amarr Dropsuits at lvl 5. Ghosts Chance's hero for 3/1/14. A manu dei et tet rimon.
Tech Ohm Eaven L.O.T.I.S. D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 1545	Posted - 2014.04.04 08:21:00 - [20] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: Those of us that were around back in the day remember that the Assault Rifles had Camera Sights and after some feedback was given, these sights were removed in favor of Iron Sights. Now, some of us genuinely didn't like aiming through the camera sights and may have preferred legitimate iron sights but there were a great many of us that initially enjoyed the immersion offered by the camera sights as it put is in place of the clone soldier we were playing. However, after a moment of retrospect I remember very distinctly why the sights back then felt so... off. It wasn't solely due to the fact that they were, after all, camera sights - but more so because at the time, whether intentional or not, there was the slight issue of aiming. Now, bear with me for a moment because this was almost two years ago so my memory might be a bit fuzzy but as I recall the issue I personally had is that the player's camera would actually move down to the sights when aiming, rather than the gun moving to the player's camera. There are a few instances of FPS games doing both, with more modern FPS games like Call of Duty and Battlefield moving the gun to the camera to facilitate better precision when directing aim at the target from the hip. A perfect example of the camera moving to the sight, today, would be 7 Days to Die in which if you aim down the sights fast enough you can actually see the camera (on the gun) being pulled from the holster on the hip; which is quite disorienting. Combine this with the initial issue of players sometimes finding it hard to voice their opinions with the right wording and the expression comes off as "I hate the sights", rather than "I hate the camera moving to the sights". Thereby, the opinion of the community is taken into account and a change is made based on what is being said. Leaving us with the iron-sights we see on the rifles today. From an immersion stand-point, it doesn't really make much sense at all. - More than 23,000 years have passed in New Eden, yet no militaristic advancement has been made beyond picatinny rails and modern iron sights. - The helmets used by the clone mercenaries are not designed to facilitate physically aiming down the sights. - The advantages of having a camera on the gun are enormous and have been utilized by real-life modern military for those benefits. So, on a lore-standpoint, it makes more sense to have the camera sights than not... but, ultimately, I feel it shouldn't interfere with the game itself - rather, it should be an option that is provided at the player's discretion based on their personal preference. Just my thoughts on the matter. no. CCP just said no more camera sights. no dev posts asking for our votes on the issue . what goes around comes around checks to see if Playstation 4 is in stock Hey CCP get a PS4 client Planetside 2 in June on PS4 Dust Deserters Alliance

Justicar Karnellia Ikomari-Onu Enforcement Caldari State 773	Posted - 2014.04.04 08:36:00 - [21] - Quote I'd say "of course" - this has been mentioned many times, there's no case for having iron sights - none at all. Hell, I'd be happy if they took the sight on the SMG or any of the other scoped weapons and put it on anything that has iron sights... I do partake in a lot of shooting, some of it competitive. Some of these events are with iron sights only so you are restricted to weapons or replicas that only ever had iron sights - and there are scoped events, where you can put a scope up to certain magnifications depend on the firing distance (6x for 200m for example). Now having also fired with red dot signts, holographic sights and scoped sights - everything about red dot sights and holographic sights is for rapid target acquisition without parallax (so you can have both eyes open). They are also optimised for short to mid-range engagements. The only scenario where you are using iron sights on modern assault rifles is in emergencies. Modern assault rifles have pop up iron sights now to not obscure the red dot/ACOG sights and more recently they actually start appearing on the SIDE of the assault rifle because they also have so much equipment cluttering the main picatinny rail (Infra-red/flashlight/etc.) So in an emergency you actually flip your assault rifle horizontally, tap the pop-up iron sights and use them, but you won't find many scenarios where they are used at all in combat situations (vehicle mounted .30 and .50 calibre weapons being the exception) I'd say 20,000 years in the future we'd even dispense with weapon mounted sights completely and as you said just have a helmet display that would generate the sights for you depending on where you were pointing your weapon and in theory this means you could just keep it at hip-level most of the time.
Korvin Lomont United Pwnage Service RISE of LEGION 881	Posted - 2014.04.04 10:04:00 - [22] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: Those of us that were around back in the day remember that the Assault Rifles had Camera Sights and after some feedback was given, these sights were removed in favor of Iron Sights. Now, some of us genuinely didn't like aiming through the camera sights and may have preferred legitimate iron sights but there were a great many of us that initially enjoyed the immersion offered by the camera sights as it put is in place of the clone soldier we were playing. However, after a moment of retrospect I remember very distinctly why the sights back then felt so... off. It wasn't solely due to the fact that they were, after all, camera sights - but more so because at the time, whether intentional or not, there was the slight issue of aiming. Now, bear with me for a moment because this was almost two years ago so my memory might be a bit fuzzy but as I recall the issue I personally had is that the player's camera would actually move down to the sights when aiming, rather than the gun moving to the player's camera. There are a few instances of FPS games doing both, with more modern FPS games like Call of Duty and Battlefield moving the gun to the camera to facilitate better precision when directing aim at the target from the hip. A perfect example of the camera moving to the sight, today, would be 7 Days to Die in which if you aim down the sights fast enough you can actually see the camera (on the gun) being pulled from the holster on the hip; which is quite disorienting. Combine this with the initial issue of players sometimes finding it hard to voice their opinions with the right wording and the expression comes off as "I hate the sights", rather than "I hate the camera moving to the sights". Thereby, the opinion of the community is taken into account and a change is made based on what is being said. Leaving us with the iron-sights we see on the rifles today. From an immersion stand-point, it doesn't really make much sense at all. - More than 23,000 years have passed in New Eden, yet no militaristic advancement has been made beyond picatinny rails and modern iron sights. - The helmets used by the clone mercenaries are not designed to facilitate physically aiming down the sights. - The advantages of having a camera on the gun are enormous and have been utilized by real-life modern military for those benefits. So, on a lore-standpoint, it makes more sense to have the camera sights than not... but, ultimately, I feel it shouldn't interfere with the game itself - rather, it should be an option that is provided at the player's discretion based on their personal preference. Just my thoughts on the matter. I would be happy to get Red dots or holo sights on the Assault variants...and some more futuristic sights that provide some data like ammo count distance to target etc...
Arx Ardashir Imperium Aeternum 738	Posted - 2014.04.04 10:46:00 - [23] - Quote Justicar Karnellia wrote: I do partake in a lot of shooting, some of it competitive. Some of these events are with iron sights only so you are restricted to weapons or replicas that only ever had iron sights - and there are scoped events, where you can put a scope up to certain magnifications depend on the firing distance (6x for 200m for example). I qualified with my M16 at 300m using the iron sights; what kind of "competition" allows for a 6x magnification scope at only 200m? On a side note, there was one range that had us using ACOGs for a quickfire exercise. I hated having both eyes open and would cheat by closing my non-firing eye for a second as I sighted down the weapon. Amarr Master - All Amarr Dropsuits at lvl 5. Ghosts Chance's hero for 3/1/14. A manu dei et tet rimon.
Monkey MAC Rough Riders.. 2376	Posted - 2014.04.04 11:04:00 - [24] - Quote While that's probably true, you do also need to consider at least with T2 systems the sights have been built with the gun in mind. We still have camera sights on the sniper rifle. Also with T3 suits I would expect camera sights to make a come back. The ADS animation is alright in my opinion (well now anyway). Unless your a Computer Scientist don't tell me how Game Mechanics Work. Monkey Mac - Forum Warrior of the Trees Lvl 2.
Mobius Wyvern Ahrendee Mercenaries Dirt Nap Squad. 5008	Posted - 2014.04.05 22:07:00 - [25] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: Those of us that were around back in the day remember that the Assault Rifles had Camera Sights and after some feedback was given, these sights were removed in favor of Iron Sights. Now, some of us genuinely didn't like aiming through the camera sights and may have preferred legitimate iron sights but there were a great many of us that initially enjoyed the immersion offered by the camera sights as it put is in place of the clone soldier we were playing. However, after a moment of retrospect I remember very distinctly why the sights back then felt so... off. It wasn't solely due to the fact that they were, after all, camera sights - but more so because at the time, whether intentional or not, there was the slight issue of aiming. Now, bear with me for a moment because this was almost two years ago so my memory might be a bit fuzzy but as I recall the issue I personally had is that the player's camera would actually move down to the sights when aiming, rather than the gun moving to the player's camera. There are a few instances of FPS games doing both, with more modern FPS games like Call of Duty and Battlefield moving the gun to the camera to facilitate better precision when directing aim at the target from the hip. A perfect example of the camera moving to the sight, today, would be 7 Days to Die in which if you aim down the sights fast enough you can actually see the camera (on the gun) being pulled from the holster on the hip; which is quite disorienting. Combine this with the initial issue of players sometimes finding it hard to voice their opinions with the right wording and the expression comes off as "I hate the sights", rather than "I hate the camera moving to the sights". Thereby, the opinion of the community is taken into account and a change is made based on what is being said. Leaving us with the iron-sights we see on the rifles today. From an immersion stand-point, it doesn't really make much sense at all. - More than 23,000 years have passed in New Eden, yet no militaristic advancement has been made beyond picatinny rails and modern iron sights. - The helmets used by the clone mercenaries are not designed to facilitate physically aiming down the sights. - The advantages of having a camera on the gun are enormous and have been utilized by real-life modern military for those benefits. So, on a lore-standpoint, it makes more sense to have the camera sights than not... but, ultimately, I feel it shouldn't interfere with the game itself - rather, it should be an option that is provided at the player's discretion based on their personal preference. Just my thoughts on the matter. The complete lack of sci-fi feel in this sci-fi game is one of the factors that really kills the immersion for me. Amidst the blue skies A link from past to future The sheltering wings of the protector
Vrain Matari Mikramurka Shock Troop Minmatar Republic 1921	Posted - 2014.04.06 00:10:00 - [26] - Quote I for one liked the camera sights and was sad to see them go. They were great for immersion and set DUST apart from the pack a little. Never had any trouble aiming with them. CCP did change them without consulting the community but to be fair there was a lot of qq from the traditional fps crowd asking for iron sights, and CCP was paying a lot of attention to the fps'ers in those days. Would love to see us able to choose our preferred sighting method someday. I support SP rollover.
Aeon Amadi Edimmu Warfighters Gallente Federation 5446	Posted - 2014.04.06 00:27:00 - [27] - Quote Vrain Matari wrote: I for one liked the camera sights and was sad to see them go. They were great for immersion and set DUST apart from the pack a little. Never had any trouble aiming with them. CCP did change them without consulting the community but to be fair there was a lot of qq from the traditional fps crowd asking for iron sights, and CCP was paying a lot of attention to the fps'ers in those days. Would love to see us able to choose our preferred sighting method someday. Right. Personally, I hate iron sights. Never liked them. More of a fan of red-dots and holographic sights, myself, but considering the technology available in Eve Online I'm surprised we're not seeing more stuff like real-life pilots have in their helmets >_>; Useful Links //forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=133588 //forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=134182
Tech Ohm Eaven L.O.T.I.S. D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 1552	Posted - 2014.04.06 00:51:00 - [28] - Quote back in the day CCP just said iron sights for assault rifles no consultation no forum threads just a middle finger to player prefrences is it June yet? checks to see if Playstation 4 is in stock Hey CCP get a PS4 client Planetside 2 in June on PS4 Dust Deserters Alliance
R F Gyro Clones 4u 1250	Posted - 2014.04.06 00:59:00 - [29] - Quote Personally I'd love to see a fitting system for guns, in addition to the one for dropsuits. You start with a basic weapon, then add/upgrade the sights, magazine, stock, barrel, etc. I'd also love to see different ammo types. So I might be rocking a Minmatar BK-42 Assault Combat Rifle with a J45 Telescopic red-dot laser sight, a lightweight K-SAC nanomesh stock, a Boundless flash suppressor and a Six Kin R100 high capacity magazine filled with Republic EMP rounds. RF Gyro: 12.5% damage bonus; 10.5% rate of fire bonus
Vrain Matari Mikramurka Shock Troop Minmatar Republic 1922	Posted - 2014.04.06 02:10:00 - [30] - Quote R F Gyro wrote: Personally I'd love to see a fitting system for guns, in addition to the one for dropsuits. You start with a basic weapon, then add/upgrade the sights, magazine, stock, barrel, etc. I'd also love to see different ammo types. So I might be rocking a Minmatar BK-42 Assault Combat Rifle with a J45 Telescopic red-dot laser sight, a lightweight K-SAC nanomesh stock, a Boundless flash suppressor and a Six Kin R100 high capacity magazine filled with Republic EMP rounds. This was on their drawing board once, but that has been reset now. Or maybe not, depending on how one reads the vague intimations coming from the CPM, or the total silence coming from CCP. I support SP rollover.



Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.