Originally Posted by NewSith
I'm thinking OSOK is fine because I am a sniper.
And also because hitting moving target is one hell of a challenge if bullet drop is present.. People will always complain about sniping if they aren't snipers themselves.
Well I am a pretty hardcore sniper myself, so this isn't so much about me personally, just what I think is fair.
Because nothing can be more irritating than being killed by somebody you didn't even see.
But, well, get over it, everyone can hit still targets, and if you're getting killed alot, try to move more frequently. Usually it's not snipers nor their weapons to blame, but your own mistakes. I already forsee shitloads of hate towards me, since the game will be f2p, now don't make it undeserved.
Well there's two aspects here. First is the irritation to the actual player. And yes, you can say that they should ultimately get over it and if they don't like it, leave the game. But we want this game to be a critical and commercial success and get the acclaim it deserves, so causing frustration and negging the game (in what could be a big way) when there's no need for it makes no sense. 2-shot-kills don't exactly bother the sniper any more, but 1-shot-kills will bother victims a lot.
Then there's the second aspect I've talked about. A lot of players will get over it, but they'll all also react by changing the way they play, even if they don't moan. People won't go outside as infantry near a body of enemies, and there won't be infantryside battles near the front line because people get one-hit-killed too much, or at least, the battles will be less intense and diminished. This in my opinion is a loss for the game that affects everyone, and most people would probably share that opinion; seeing as this is a player-driven game, surely we want players doing a variety of dynamic things in the battle field to make the fights more interesting with more variables, not hidden behind cover 80% of the time or only driving vehicles in the field.
|