Am I the only one that finds this incredibly stupid?
Firing without aiming is pointless if you have ironsights. There's no reason not to use them. This is such a pointless ability, especially in games where you have a reticle.
So why add them?
All they do is add an obligation to the player. It's so stupid that there's a "fire-button" and a "actually hit things when you shoot" button.
Why do I even have a targeting reticle that sits there in the middle of the screen if I'm going to have to use ironsights anyway?
It works in slower paced, puesdo-realistic shooters where hip-firing actually sucks. think STALKER, Red Orchestra or ARMA.
It's shitty when added to games that are supposed to be faster because all it does is slow down movement and limit FOV in an effort to make the skill ceiling lower. Usually combined with some snap-on autoaim too. Because consoles.
As an ironsight fag, I can see why some people don't like it. It all depends on the game. I thought ironsights almost felt out of place in Titanfall just because of how fast the gameplay can be. I don't like playing CS because there are no ironsights.
It's fine if the game is trying to be realistic, like Red Orchestra or Rainbow Six or something, because in real life it is really fucking hard to shoot without slowing down, bringing the gun up to your face, and looking down the sights. It's arcadey games like Call of Duty where iron sights are pointless, because all they do is slow down what could me a much more exciting, faster-paced game.
>Being this retarded
Holy shit, /v/ has a new low.
>What is better accuracy
>What is precision aiming
>What is zeroing
Reticules are almost never 100% accurate dickface. Goodluck hipfiring at an enemy more that 10 yards away.
It depends on the game. I agree that iron sights are a burden in CoD where people are sprinting at you with two shotguns, but a game like RO2 or Insurgency would be awful without them.
That's just silly. They add another layer of mechanics to a game. In close/twitch situations, the person hip firing always wins. In long range situations, it lowers the fov and lets players focus on whatever it is they are aiming at.
Fucking oldfags. You really need to get with the times.
>iron sights have zoom
>peep sights are used like normal sights
>sights don't actually have a front and back sight interacting with each other, it's just all straight the whole time
If you're going to add it and not put any effort why bother.
I'm implying that just slapping iron sights onto any old game doesn't make it "realistic".
ARMA is in its own way, fun. But that's because having iron sights matches the pace and tone of the game.
STALKER is fun because the iron sights add to the tension.
Iron sights putting up in something like Rage, HALO (HALO is slowly but surely getting there now that 343 is developing), Titanfall or other ostensibly "Fast paced" games is shitty. It slows down the game and is usually paired with auto aim features. All it does is deemphasize movement and make aiming easier when used in those games.
The thing is, because COD has iron sights, most FPS games, regardless of other design choices seem forced to add them as a "Check the box" feature in order to be published. Because publishers want to copy what's popular with their biggest market.
Basically what I said, yeah. Games built around being a little bit slower and more deliberate make iron sights work.
In most FPS games built around close range deathmatch shooting, its just a lazy addition.
Game design as a whole has to jive together.
Games that don't primarily rely on irons can be fun, like Fistful of Frags, but it can also be used as artificial difficulty, like CSGO.
But most games would be whack without iron sights, and not having them would be bullshit. Not every game needs to be CS.
>I suck at fps games
>Must be because of the game's mechanics
But he's right. It is artificial difficulty, because you've got to learn how to move, tap, and adjust for spread.
It's a good thing because the more of that there is in the game, the more there is to learn.
Uhm, because you can't really know where the weapon really is pointed unless you have a crosshair, that is before you look down the sights
like irl, but irl we have the weapon in our hands and have a sense of where the muzzle is pointed
Iron Sights in video games make those who can actually get good at hip firing become gods.
I love games like Blacklight where everybody is a crouching high-hp slow faggot and you blitz them running at 3 times their speed headshotting them with a 950 RPM SMG.
What was the deal with sights in Bioshock?
Hip firing was perfectly fine but looking down the sights didn't seem to affect accuracy. It took the crosshair away and the weapon models weren't super detailed so it felt like more of a detriment to your aim.
In fact you could have gone the whole game without knowing about the sights and did just fine. The only time it's useful is with the crossbow and that only zooms it in further I think.
I would have no problem with iron sights if it gave some sort of disadvantage compared to shooting from the hip like going into iron sight mode would take ~2 seconds. right now i dont see any downside of iron sighting at all even with the super short delay u get before being able to shoot
A perfect example of a game not really designed for iron sights, but where they were added because some marketing analyst says that adding ironsights will add 3% to the overall sales numbers.
People still play apparently. around 700-800 maybe. I got into the game about 2 months before they came to steam, and that was a fun time. Now I don't even know if the game will get an update, because Zombie "wanted the PS4 audience" and forgot where Retribution got popular. It's not even 2:30 yet and remembering this game makes me want something stiff because remembering how much fun I had hurts.
TLDR, yes, play it. It's pay to not grind, and you can do good with the default loadout.
>it messes with the flow of the game
You've been brainwashed by shitty arguments on /v/. As if there's some pure "flow" that exists outside of a million other choices. Trying to identify one mostly-cosmetic mechanic in isolation as ruining anything is retarded.
The AR in Halo couldn't hit the broad side of a barn door, all that thing was meant for was spraying into groups, hence the huge magazine.
Pretty nice to use if you're in that situation, although it gets useless quickly during 343 Guilty Spark when the flood turn up.
It's like /v/ hates guns that use clips. Picture related is a great gun with clips.
>Firing without aiming is pointless if you have ironsights. There's no reason not to use them.
Generally speed and maneuverability are reasons to not use them. When aiming down sight devs generally make you move slower and even easier to hit. A lot of games also apply accuracy penalties if you start firing your gun during the animation of the gun lining up with the player's eye while ADS, this means you either are aiming with the accuracy of hipfire and firing soon after targeting an enemy, or you have to wait a moment to fully sight the target, creating a delay. Then there's also FOV changes aometimes when you ADS and different recoil mechanics.
In short, you're wrong.
>This is such a pointless ability, especially in games where you have a reticle. So why add them?
Iron sights are generally used in games with long and short engagement distances as a means to differentiate the weapons into at least 3 ranged categories; short range, medium range, and long range. The categories are usually differentiated by 3 key factors. Most common are fire rate, range before damage reduction is applied to the bullets, and hip fire accuracy.
In short, class/loadout based games with long engagement ranges.
>All they do is add an obligation to the player. It's so stupid that there's a "fire-button" and a "actually hit things when you shoot" button.
They add the element of calculated risk and require the player to make quick decisions about how to engage an enemy. So in a sense you're actually right, they do add an obligation to the player. You need to know when it simply isn't viable to use your sights because your target is so close, and know the match ups of what weapons in what ranges will likely overpower you if the other player is equally skilled.
you are such a massive idiot, sometimes you need your peripheral vision, other times you need to focus in on something in the distance.
I just don't like them because they force you to move slowly, in a genre where almost all of the good examples value your freedom of movement.
There's not much of a point tending towards realism in these games, because playing through a super-realistic firefight would be boring as fuck.
It uses clips. It is an excellent clip fed rifle.
not if someone is within 15m of you, what idiot would use iron sights for that?
It's not my fault you don't know about glorious clips.
No small arm is clip fed, some can be reloaded by clips but that doesn't mean they are clip fed, every modern firearm has a magazine, and it's either an external or internal one.
Iron sights from a gameplay perspective in competitive multiplayer exist in order to reduce skill discrepancy. They add an inherent delay before you are capable of accurate fire which hurts very quick players the most and also significantly reduce movement speed and mobility, which makes people into easier targets when they are shooting and also works against players who could otherwise be just as accurate while moving quickly.
They're there to narrow down the skill gap so people who have no idea what the fuck they're doing don't get constantly destroyed without standing a chance. They also work very well with controllers because your aim time and accuracy are inherently handicapped by the input method, so the disadvantages aren't as readily apparent in that case.
There's also "realism" to consider, but most games which use IS are completely unrealistic anyway so this argument can pretty much be dismissed completely. There are a few games that actually aim to be realistic and having IS in these makes perfect sense and also matches their pacing, but these games aren't actually the extremely popular ones that caused IS to infect everything in the first place.
Here's a time where not using ironsights saved me.
in insurgency, if you sight in over cover or while prone you deploy your bipod if the weapon has one. If you stop looking down the sights but don't move, you can shoot without looking down the sights.
Yeah man why would talented developers ever bother to increase the immersion factor of games by modeling how real small arms are fired in their mechanics?
All FPS should be the same they were in 1995 with the only weapons being giant miniguns/rocket launchers that don't need sights, with a cyborg hud reticule.
We're talking about iron sights in FPS moron, not regenerating health (there are many FPS games with iron sights and without regenerating health, games you KNOW NOTHING ABOUT because you prefer to reminisce about all the shitty arena shooters of the 90s with a bunch of sick whining on 4chan).
Aiming down sight enables 3 things:
1. lower fov allowing you to focus better at far away objects
2. lower mouse/stick sensitivity for a finer aim
3. provides a realistic reference of where exactly a bullet will go when you fire.
it's that simple.
why are you glad hip fire is useless? you think in real life people only shoot with iron sights? i even asked people in real life in the millitary and say that a lot of time your just keeping the gun to your shoulder but not actually looking down the sight
>Bro my cousoin is totally a marine, and he said....
Yeah, when PVT Bootfuck is laying down suppression and thinks its ok to mag dump without looking down sights he isn't going to hit shit or effectively suppress.
Anybody competent is going to at least get a gross sight picture (front sight post somewhere inside the bounds of the rear sight) or use a CCO if they are decently well equipped.
Of course we are talking about vidya on this board, and realism needs to take a backseat to game mechanics anyway, so I don't see why the opinions of a guy who know a guy in the military is important.
depends on the game, but for the most part you're right. for example, for MGS Ground Zeroes the aim down sight doesnt improve bullet spread it just provides a better reference.
>Shoot from the hip in close quarters.
Still shouldered with a CCO or a gross sight picture. Your friend sounds shit as his job, considering everybody that's been trained in the last 30 years has been taught to exclusively use sights, and before that point fire was a pretty high level skill that didn't see much use.
There are specific techniques and ways of holding rifles from the last 10 years that are designed to make fast sighted shooting even more effective.
Your friend was bad at his job.
>So why add them?
Because ironsights heavily simplify the game flow of a fps, making getting kills easier overall.
In a game with ironsights even braindead people can get multiple kills with ease without needing to actually develop aiming skill.
Ironsight are mostly to slow down the pace of the game and introduce teamwork/strategic elements while hip fire only is more based on individual skill.
I like both types of games, they're just different.
>Ironsight are mostly to slow down the pace of the game and introduce teamwork/strategic elements
This is absolutely dogshit.
Counter strike has always been one of if not the most tactical and strategic team fps and there are no ironsights apart from 2 unused guns and actual sniper rifles.
You pie the corner if you're alone, or "flood the room" if you're in a team.
An asshole that stops to stick his rifle around a corner in a house while stacked up slows everybody else down and is awkwardly exposing himself without really being able to hit shit.
Because my pet peeve is taking the information of one person in the military as gospel. Fuck don't even believe just me, go watch youtube video on how the military clears rooms and deals with corners.
I mean in games with combined arms and stuffs, attack/defense point, objective based mods or whatever. In deathmatch hipfire only is better.
In the end, all I want variety. I want both games with ironsight or no ironsight. More is better than less.
>not hipfired mosin nagant
It's seriously the only gun I can reliably hipfire with
Killing MGfags and SMGfags with one hit all day erry day, had a 12-man streak in C of PavlovsHouse