remember when we had realistic accuracy and guns wouldnt do shit? well, its probably unpopular opinion here, but from my pov those times were great, it really gives feeling of ww2 and not modern combat when guns are somewhat less precise (LMGs would have been good if there was use for bipod)
but playerbase disagrees, well, since its like that, how about we get option to make weapons realistic in custom battle setting? i see this an absolute win!
or we can pull it even more to the arcade-style, majority here seems to love accurate laser guns with little to no recoil, well, that could be a setting as well
Hopefully we will see more options for custom battles like that.
That way people who want to snipe people via hipfire of a machine gun while jumping 7ft in the air will be happy and the ārealismā crowd will be happy.
As cool of an idea as this is, there unfortunately problems to overcome to make it work.
You would need to establish two separate databases for the weapon stats per gun. And without a solid monetization model for the Dev team, its highly unlikely they would devote resources to it.
Iām not discounting the idea, I would expand on it even more by removing med kits completely.
The only time I have seen a Dev devote resources to something else in game was when the populace did a fundraiser in a sense for it.
In MWO people wanted the āUrban Mechā It was a cult following and became a Meme on the forums (along with a couple of April Fools Jokes about it). However, the Devs decided to see if the forum would put its money where its mouth was, and offered it for preorder with the caveat that if enough was raised they would do it.
And sure enough, they pulled it off in spectacular fashion. It was a great success.
If Enlisted gets big enough, and out of Beta, then perhaps enough people asking could envoke the same thing.
From someone who has seen the crunch on the other side, and knows how overworked staff can be, it is hard to add things that donāt follow the already conceived āpathā of the game.
That is still a lot of Programming without a clear cut path to making money.
At the end of the day, no company will invest in those level of changes without some type of ROI.
It sounds simple to do at times, but depending on the framework of this games engine it could potentially take a lot of resources to accomplish (minus the disabling of shooting while jumping , that could be an exception command).
When I worked on just Rudder controls for a plane, It was over 90 days to get it right. And when we had to adjust something with the other surfaces controls, that took more than 45. Stuff that might seem simple, can be really complex in games.
I wasnāt in the Alpha so Iām glad you can speak for it. It would then depend on how much the code has changed from then till now if they can keep two instances of it going.
Again, Iām all for something like t his, I just know it takes $$$ to make some stuff be prioritized.
I have not played it, but just ask the alpha testers and they will tell you the same, if you watch a gameplay video of the alpha with one of now, you will notice that the animation, graphics, models are clearly worse or simplified, clearly you have all the right when you say it is a question of money, but in my opinion they have wasted money by changing their minds during work
The evolution of a game is never a simple thing. It sometimes works and sometimes doesnāt. That money is only wasted if the net result has a negative financial impact.
In WoWP, the swap from Pre 2.0 to 2.0 was sweeping, massive in scope and impact. And, it could have made people leave (it did) but in turn it brought in more revenue and more population than those who left, so the balance sheet was positive, and the money was not āwastedā.
Without knowing that information its hard to say if the direction they are going at DF is the right one. Time will tell.
As for a realistic game model, I want one too. Trust me.
Its going to be a matter of time / money /resources.
If we survive actual ālaunchā and there is enough backing to do it, perhaps we will get it.
Agree, it is more the vision of the game to be non-definitive, they switched from one type of gameplay to another, if they said their actual vision of the game for sure they would have more support, from the playerbase and would attract many more players
I remember that at that time the bolt-action rifle might get stuck when changing ammo.Itās actually quite interesting, as long as it doesnāt happen when encountering an enemy at close range.
i played both alpha tests, and the game did improve alot, ALOT since then.
nothing was better in alpha besides the fact we could play with tiger and stg in berlin
movement , hitreg, fire , fps , everything in its own way have improved. alot,
there is still more work to be done, but the game already did improved alot since alpha.
the early alpha and early beta gameplay, the movement didnt felt it had gravity or friction. most times your camera would shake just because . the movement did infact improved alot.
I might be overestimating it, but that is because I donāt see the meta data behind it, so at best I am making educated guesses based on previous experience in the industry.
They for sure have the original source code for this. Its just a matter of if it can interface with what we have today.
Anywho, that is neither here nor there. There needs to be incentive to do such a project.
Iāve literally seen it once, as previously described.
Iād crowdfund it here too if I knew it would work.
When it happened on MWO , I bought myself the pack, and 10 more for giveaways because I believed in them. enough to make it happen.
It can happen if there is enough support.
First thing though is first, before we get ahead of ourselves. We need the F2P economy fixed or every conversation we have here or elsewhere is moot. No point in modes if you deep six your playerbase.
