Do insta-kill guns have a place in shooters?

Let's perform a test. I will shoot you in the head or chest with a relatively small caliber, let's say a .22 long.

After being shot, I will require you to pickup a machinegun, and shoot back at me, while correcting for recoil, and not dying.


play insurgency instead of halo

>>386492504
Headshots are instakill most of the time anyway.

>>386492504
no, not even if they're hard to aim because someone will always get good at it and then they'll be untouchable

>>386492835
yeah, fuck rewarding skill.

>>386492835

>they'll be untouchable

Implying that you can "touch" real life snipers without using artillery or suppressive fire.

>>386492504
Most twitch shooters like rainbow six siege or cod use guns with short TTK which is near one shot kill.

In arena shooters they tend to be power weapons and act as a dynamic map element for people to struggle for.

Tl;dr yes.

>>386492504
depends on the gun and the game
weapon pick ups that instakill are ok
if its anything like the release version of CSGO revolver then fuck no

>>386492921
why can't you get skillful at a balanced gun?

>>386492963
who gives a fuck you realism autist no one cares this is videogames not real life

weapons irl aren't made to be balanced you fucking shitstain but in a multiplayer shooter you have to consider balance

Instagib UT04 was the GOAT shooter

>>386493516

>who gives a fuck you realism autist
>manages to sound like an autistic fuck

Who gives a fuck? Literally most fps shooters above the age of 20. The older the demographic, the more chance they will gravitate towards teamwork mechanics, realism, realistic guns, environments, etc.

The average age of arma3 players is like 34.

Average age of COD players is around 11.


prove me wrong. you cant.

>implying instagib wasn't the best mutator

>>386493443
because I can be skillful at a high risk - high reward gun.

it's more fun that way.

>>386492504

Instagib Quake/Unreal servers were always my favorite because there was no weapon control. It was purely who could aim the fastest and move across the map the best.

>play halo
>insane amount of aim assist and bullet magnetism
>especially on fucking snipers

Disgusting

>>386493857
>sniper
>high risk

>>386493728
>Literally most fps shooters above the age of 20. The older the demographic, the more chance they will gravitate towards teamwork mechanics, realism, realistic guns, environments, etc.

I can't tell if you're serious about this or not

>>386493728
>prove me wrong. you cant.

you can't prove yourself right to begin with moron, what a nonsensical statistic to shit out of your ass

File: 1501891333576.gif (899KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

899KB, 600x600px

Insta-kill weapons needs to have a downside to make them capable of being taken on by normal weapons. Maybe if they have shit accuracy or range, or perhaps have long reloads to expose you.

I feel like OHKO weapons should give you a last chance to get to cover and heal yourself before you bleed out

>>386492504
No, because there's no counter play or way of reacting.
You either die immediately or you don't. Flipping a coin is dull as shit.

>>386494027
When a sniper misses they give away their position and take a long ass time to reload.

File: 35450_screenshots_2013-05-30_00001.jpg (294KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

294KB, 1920x1080px

>>386492504
not all shooters, the balance with the other weapons is everything. For instance, in pic related you can plink someones face with the weakest in-game round and still kill him, so in games that take shot placement more seriously it makes sense. But context is everything.

>>386494316
Why does every shooter have to be reactionary instead of tactical?

>>386494609
Easier to make.

>>386494189
I think it makes more sense to limit their availability. Say its a 32-player fps, have only a couple in-map weapons that can do that or limit it to a small minority of roles.

File: b4f.jpg (23KB, 569x428px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 569x428px

>>386492504
I'd say they do. Yes, getting one shotted can be cancerous at times BUT depending on the weapon in use a one shot would/should makes sense. If i use a shotgun in an FPS i expect it to OHK another player in close quarters if I hit them with enough pellets, if I use a sniper rifle I expect to get one shot kill head shots. If it wasn't that way and shotguns needed 2 full body shots or a sniper 2 headshots to kill I'd consider those weapons garbage and that it would make no sense that those weapons DON'T one shot people.

Planetside 2 devs tried this "removing OHK gimmick" in game by nerfing a lot of vehicle weapons. What ensued was the players leaving, raging on chat and complaining just how stupid some of the changes sound. For example tanks had received a nerf to almost all its weapons and explosive armor for infantry got a buff. It would now take a tank 2 shots from its main gun to kill an infantryman wearing explosive armor. Why should a soldier ever be able to survive a 150mm tank round to the face? its stupid