What's your opinion on spread in shooter games...

What's your opinion on spread in shooter games? Should guns be accurate and limited by recoil control and mechanical skill, or should they be determined by spread patterns or randomized spread?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=_3rfYnfp-RM
youtu.be/v0rlCJ047Ds?t=38s
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

>should guns be good, or should they be retarded

Depends on what kind of strategy you want to play with. Would you rather play with Halo's gun mechanics or CS' gun mechanics?

I don't like either, prefer accurate guns with realistic moa

It really depends if you are going for a high skill ceiling fps or a gun/war sim

Completely random bullet spread would be silly in a competitive fps but realistic in a simulation.

Spread and recoil are both usually random, whats the big difference other than one looks your screen is being jerked around?

>but realistic in a simulation

?

>that really depends on what your opinion is on spread in shooter games

Assuming perfect shooter how accurate are guns and rapid fire naturally anyway?

Whatever makes the video game the most fun.

Any answer than that is mad as gay and yall should feel bad for being so bad at thinking.

Guns aren't perfectly accurate even if they're held in a vice and aimed by a computer.

recoil moves your point of aim, spread determines how far off the point of aim your rounds land.

>should X be randomized in this game we're supposed to take seriously?
Just model bullet spread by dropping off damage at a distance proportional to the amount of bullets that would randomly miss.

Are you asking how accurate an IRL gun is when in full-auto?
The answer is they aren't.

>Having your shots hit far away from where you were aiming is fun

There's no correct answer.

It depends on the developer intent for how the game should be played.

fucking retard, guns are needlessly accurate. Your shooting ability is limited by your ability not the guns

So it would be unrealistic for a gun not to have both recoil and spread?

I don't understand why we can't just have a shooter model where
>bullet will always go where the sight is.
>implement vertical kick that is proportional to rate of fire
>fuck horizontal kick, only implement sway when moving, this will also be provided through visual feedback of the sight
>keep bullet drop, have damage drop off within reason.

I don't understand why people want spray patterns so badly when this removes the RNG without unnecessary burden of information

Shotguns are shown at 75yds. (and there's at least a video of a 12-gauge shooting a clay pigeon at 130yds.).

Slugs are shown at 200yds.
youtube.com/watch?v=_3rfYnfp-RM

Have you ever actually fired a fully-automatic rifle?

Yes it would be unrealistic, but we're talking about satisfying game-play which realism has always taken the back seat to.

And yet the deviance still isn't randomly generated.

>Should guns be accurate and limited by recoil control and mechanical skill
This
PUBG does it right

All games should have the same mechanics, duh.

What's that smaller cylinder that tapers off within the larger cone supposed to represent?

Slugs.
They get more accurate the farther they go.

Fully automatic weapons were not designed to be accurate. Fully automatic weapons are rarely used as a result. Fully automatic is used to suppress fire, IE shooting a bunch of bullets really fast to scare people, not hit them. Watch based hicock45 shoot a fully auto mp40 or glock.

Aren't they used for CQC also?

>I don't like either, prefer accurate guns with realistic moa
CS guns are fucking accurate as fuck if you learn how to spray retard.

Yes but most governments switched to using bullpups for CQC. Slower rate of fire.

>realism is more important than balance

You seem mad

Says the guy who cant git gud

Since real life is the most balanced thing ever, that is one and the same.

It kinda is. Barrel harmonics, discrepencies in the load, powder burn rates, unpredictable atmospheric conditions all make it ridiculously complicated, to the point that from a player's point of view it may as well be random.

when people argue about how much they want realism in their videogames it's usually just people who want their preferred gun to be buffed to be an unstoppable death machine.
there are plenty of videogames that have realistic gun mechanics but people don't play them because they're not fun

>Since real life is the most balanced thing ever

>to a retards point of view, it may as well be random

Yeah. You're the one who mentioned a simulation user.

what a retarded thing to say. you can't possibly believe that

>They get more accurate the farther they go.
How does it deviate less from the center the farther it goes?

>feedback of the sight
If it's miniscule, maybe.. Real guns have feeling-feedback.

youtu.be/v0rlCJ047Ds?t=38s

>quotes 90% of post and posts a random image

SHOUTGUNS AND SNIPERS ARE LITERAL CANCER KEEP THEM OUT OF VIDEOGAMES§

Augmented arms to hold your augmented gun in an augmented way when ? spray is a last century thing.

aerodynamics. It's only true to a point btw. Eventually the slug slows below supersonic and it gets less accurate again.

>Guns in CS 1.6 aren't as accurate as you might think
Wow its like thats how the game has been since it started. Wow its almost like you're shit at video games.

If you actually understand what balance is, you would understand what I mean.

I've never fired a gun in real life before so I'm just going to say "whichever feels better". Even an idiot knows that shotguns don't have the ten foot effective range that they seem to have in lots of vidya, and nailing enemies at decent ranges with well-aimed shotgun blasts always felt satisfying.

all those factors involved minus spread patterns

>Even an idiot knows that shotguns don't have the ten foot effective range that they seem to have in lots of vidya
I hope you mean to say this as in it is a lot more than how video games portray.

Yeah, that's what I meant.

Spread is tiny in most games because the gun fight arenas are relatively tiny to real life situations. Other than urban ambushes, a firefight can be around 100-150 meters or more.
And that's not taking into account of other "mechanics" of real life like being incapacitated or slowed down just by being wounded rather than straight up killed.
tl;dr super wide shotgun spread is fine in an arcade setting, but if you want realism, play a simulator

I've actually been thinking about this for a bit but didn't feel like making a thread

What if instead of sending the bullets off into slightly random directions, every bullet shoots straight to where you aim- but depending on the distance and the gun's accuracy value a ''die'' is rolled to decide whether it hit or not.
Basically the effect would be roughly the same if you're aiming well, but there's no chance of hitting someone you didn't aim for

Are there any games that do this?

whoa, deep brah

we're talking about weapon balance, what the fuck are you talking about, the first law of thermodynamics?

>shoot larger caliber bullet does less damage
>shotgun shoots 2 feet
>hold your breath to aim
>pistols can do anything
>smgs are for hip fire
>lmgs are just for spaying
>dual wielding guns
>knives insta kill

I think you are both retarded.

Borderlands maybe? But that would be putting an extra code to every bullet, rather than every shot, so could lead to optimization issues.

DELETE THIS

I'm interested in what the average service rifle's mechanical accuracy is but I've never seen any sources. I've heard people say 2-4 moa for good quality ones like NATO which sounds reasonable but I'm unsure because the only time anyone ever brings spread out is for marksmen and snipers. Then there are other stuff like open bolt LMGs which are obviously different.

yes, and you're the epitome of intellect with your quality inputs

I hope you are at least self aware.

>>hold your breath to aim
have you ever actually fired a gun?
holding your breath helps immensely to steady your aim, which should be fucking obvious to anyone anyway

>Why is accuracy a good mechanic?

battlefield?

FA weapons are a core mechanic in any military so saying their rarely used is incorrect. Also suppression is not just a random spray of bullets near the enemy when properly use a mg or other FA weapon your trying to create a beatin zone which is an oval shaped pattern created by the recoil of the weapon and the fact that each round will have a slightly different trajectory then the other. At any range this beaten zone should be no more then 2 mils wide.

most games actually make it too easy. In real life, it's fucking hard to just aim for a second and hit a head-sized target from like 30-40 meters, and it's 10x harder if it's a moving target. Especially if you're using a gun you just picked up and you are not used to.

I think games like Red Orchestra 2 did it right

>what is Insurgency
>what is Red Orchestra

Yes. You should calm your breathing not hold your breath then lose control of the gun after like your having a stroke.

I really like RO2 and ArmA 2 for this

How often did you deploy use of fully auto? Unless you were a gunner for convoys the answer is likely never.

>I can't hold my breath for more than 5 seconds
Consider drinking less molten butter

Some video games have huge MOAs at about 10-20 which is pretty ridiculous

i like spread, as long as it isnt doom 3s shotgun
that thing sucked

>we're talking about weapon balance

Meaning what exactly user? All weapons being the exact same?

At least we aren't as retarded as you.

That might actually be the single most retarded system I've ever heard suggested.

>slugs

m8 u srs

I love spreads and wish they were highlighted and explained in-depth by the game. They should be a clear and defined mechanic.

Day of Defeat had the best recoil control ever and it saddens me nobody has copied it.

I'm pretty sure this is how battlefield 1 works.

Magnetic bullets are clearly the best because then they make the player like he's deadly and good at the game.

Unfortunely I got in to late to do a combat deployment so I hope you dont mind a scenario instead. So your doing a sercurity patrol in your AO you go out with a platoon of riflemen and a machinegun attachment. On this patrol you take contact so obviously you return fire and take cover from thier you want move in and flank the enemy so you setup a base of fire on some small hill or berm or whatever with your mg squad and a rifle squad they begin suppressing the enemy as you use your maneuver to flank the enemy the BOF keeps the enemys head and taking a few of them off in the process this allows the manuver element to flank with little to no interruption killing the enemy withe hopefully no casualties on your side.

Why do you type all retarded?

He is a millitary.

I just do.