One of the things every shooter should learn from COD is the high look sensitivity it allows. I personally tend to run max sensitivity in these games (mainly from too much time spent playing Nazi zombies) and can handle it just fine. Its no different to me than using your mouse to do an instant 180 to see what's behind you. It has saved me a few times when someone starts shooting at my back, as I'm able to flip completely around and shoot them back.
I know The Division is a RPG first and foremost, but it is also a shooter. Please don't hammstring me with a slow 'max' sensitivity. I realize not everyone can do this but there's no reason I shouldn't be able to look around as fast as I can turn my head, and just because you offer it doesn't mean people who don't want it have to use it.
Please, run into the middle of the street at me with your quick reflexes, as I duck behind a car and my buddy picks you off from a window your go-go-go rambo speed addicted mind neglected to consider
Oh pish posh muffin you want to be a cracked out bunny rabbit on the battlefield while you dont want people using vehicles?? This is NOT COD, you are in for a shocker I think...
highly doubt you're going to be willing to put yourself in a situation where you need the added reflexes because the risk of death is so high.. you'll definitely not want to risk dying in this game, as its fundamental goals are to make you explore and survive.
end of thread.
tl;dr: Its stupid but I agree
I'm not exactly sure what you said, but I got the idea that you seem to think that slow reflexes are better than fast reflexes which just seems counterintuitive. And you act like because I run sensitivity high means I have to be stupid tactically? Again your not making any sense at all. But way to resort to Reductio Add Absurdum to make your case. Or is it just that you can't handle a high sensitivity and don't want to compete with people that can? As I specifically pointed out just because they offer a higher level doesn't mean you have to use it, yet this idea seems to have seriously threatened you.Originally Posted by kingtouch29 Go to original post
But please, try complete sentences next time. I shouldn't have to unscramble the thought your trying to convey.
I think it's a logical fallacy to indirectly call me an idiot by exaggerating how poor the style of my post is.. actually, that's more than oneOriginally Posted by Moorningstaar Go to original post
Anyway, my point stressed is that...
It's unrealistic, Idk if you've paintballed or something similar before but you don't twist and turn and jump and dodge dip and duck (unless its speedball, which this game is not).
You think I'm afraid? I already wished you luck with your foolish decision (placed you below me).
And I NEVER said slow reflexes are better, that's another logical fallacy btw, but I do think you're right in saying that I neglected the fact that very arcadey controls could work in a survival grounded online RPG FPS, I just think when it comes down to it you'll value the ability to shoot what you want with better efficiency.
and I can do it, not at full, its not hard son aaaaaaaaaaalso, looks like this game has some beastly auto aim so it probably doesnt matter at any rate
look at my comment again, look at the word count of it. I think it wasnt hard to unscamble
So what you're looking for is Axial Speed [what you call `stick sensitivity`] so you can flip around by nudge/tapping your thumbstick.
Nothing wrong with that - if this was a shooter.
It's good you acknowledge that it's *not* a shooter. Shooting is just a part of the combat system.
I think the closest thing out there right now to compare this game to is The Last of Us and Fallout 3 / New Vegas - but still very different.
Yes, there is a bunch of shooting in those games [a crap-ton in Fallout], but shooting isn't the name of the game, or even the focus.
Obviously there isn't going to be the same twitch-reflex style of play required for this game - otherwise they'd be showing us FPS,
not OTS-FPS/3PV [over-the-shoulder FPS / 3rd person views]
In a game designed for exploration, survival and teamwork, you won't be hamstrung by not being able to go all crack-bunny in a firefight.
Given that this is open-world RPG, you'll have a camera you can swing around you, *almost* eliminating the need for twitch-reflexes.
Don't get me wrong, the speed at which you can swing that camera on its axis is important.
Don't forget - this ain't COD and most likely won't be anything like that style of gameplay. Watch the trailers again.
Nobody running off into the middle of combat, nobody throwing random knives to bounce off rooftops 30 times before randomly killing
someone who just spawned, none of that traditional FPS crap.
This isn't a shooter game. Shooting is only part of the combat system for it.
As long as I can move my scope as fast as the target moving I am happy. That is why I run on high sensitivity in COD and all that so I can move my scope as fast as the target is running. As long as I can move this fast I am completely happy with the speed of the camera. (I always play the sniper in case you couldn't tell)
@Seir I agree especially with the 3rd person perspective you will not have a big issue with camera speed.
You are still stuck in this idea that if I use a high stick sensitivity I must be A COMPLETE MORON TACTICALLY. You keep making allusions to me "running into the middle of the street" and "run and gunning". This statement is exactly what makes people think your saying poor reflexes (as modeled by the inablitiy to react quickly) are better than good reflexes.Originally Posted by kingtouch29 Go to original post
First you guys need to understand the difference between COD and this game to understand a few things. Cash On Delivery ENFORCES only two game styles in their TDM (closest to open world combat); run and gun, and camper. They do this with a horrible spawn system that makes it hard to group back up after dying, and by not giving any team based abilities that might encourage grouping up in the first place.
Now they haven't mentioned what the spawn system in this game will be like, but they have clearly shown team based abilities, and classes. If done properly no one class can be very effective on its own, and the best teams will be the ones that have each archetype, so yes, I understand this is a TEAM BASED GAME. I GET IT. I LOOK FORWARD TO IT. Hell you don't know how many times I tried to get people to work together as a team in COD but you go on making the assumption that I can't tell the difference between different game styles. This in no way effects the advantage gained if someone gets the drop on me, that I might be able to turn and target on them fast enough to save myself. And if you think only bad players will get caught you are sadly mistaken. Also I love paintball, and I seriously don't understand how you think paintball supports your case. I didn't say anything about running jumping etc. I said I wanted to be able to turn as fast as in real life . . . kind of like you can in paintball when someone bunkers you, or your bunkering someone.
And I didn't say you were an idiot because you didn't use complete sentences. I said I wasn't sure what your saying. If you look through my posts you'll see that I've had to edit nearly every single one simply because after a reread I realized I hadn't used complete sentences, or made my thoughts clear (or had let how pissed someone's allusion to me being an idiot because I can use a high sensitivity). And thank you for making your statements more clear this time.
@ Seirx This game IS a shooter. They are focusing first and foremost on the RPG aspects which suits me just fine, but that doesn't change the fact that you aim at targets, as opposed to simply targeting an enemy with an ability.
Guys I don't want to turn this game into COD. If you've read some of my other posts I've pointed out myself how the run and gun COD trained kids out their are going to be in for a shock in this game. This does not in any way mean UBI can't learn from what other shooters have done correctly.
I think we may need to agree-to-disagree here..
Using Fallout 3/New Vegas as examples, I wouldn't call them shooter games. The originals [Fallout, 2, Tactics, Brotherhood of Steel] were 3/4 isometric top-down games.
Everything was turn-based [and you could force-fire], and in 3/New Vegas they changed to FPS-style view, with 3P-FPS views options.
The games are still "rpgs with shooting elements". Being able to free-fire / force-fire doesn't make it a shooter. But it does bring it closer. Just my 2 cents.
One thing's for sure - we'll find out when it comes out.. and I look forward to looting your corpse 8P
{I'll be sure to try and boobytrap my own for your amusement]
I haven't played all the games you have, but here's my definition of a shooter; does aim affect whether you hit? If you simply target a character (traditional MMO style) then its not a shooter. But if you have to aim at someone and keep them in a reticle or sight then its a shooter (not to be confused with side scrolling shooters lol). Mass Effect was a shooter. I believe it was even billed as a shooter RPG, because your ability to aim is important.Originally Posted by SeirX Go to original post
That said--and having reconsidered some earlier remarks--I want a high sensitivity even if its not a shooter. Being able to look over your shoulder behind yourself quickly is not limited to those games. I used to do it in MMO's all the time. Then all I had to do was swipe with the mouse but it was still usefull, and I would like the ability here.