|
|
| 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
|
Aeon Amadi
Edimmu Warfighters
Gallente Federation
5424
|
Posted - 2014.04.04 05:42:00 -
[2] - 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
|
Aeon Amadi
Edimmu Warfighters
Gallente Federation
5424
|
Posted - 2014.04.04 05:46:00 -
[3] - 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
|
Aeon Amadi
Edimmu Warfighters
Gallente Federation
5425
|
Posted - 2014.04.04 06:02:00 -
[4] - 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
|
Aeon Amadi
Edimmu Warfighters
Gallente Federation
5425
|
Posted - 2014.04.04 06:07:00 -
[5] - 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
|
Aeon Amadi
Edimmu Warfighters
Gallente Federation
5428
|
Posted - 2014.04.04 07:12:00 -
[6] - 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
|
Aeon Amadi
Edimmu Warfighters
Gallente Federation
5446
|
Posted - 2014.04.06 00:27:00 -
[7] - 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
|
|
|
| |
|