Originally Posted by Malorn
If this is a game about tradeoffs then the ironsights too should have a tradeoff - and that tradeoff is "aim" time. That's how BF3 did it. Irons were the fastest, then holos, then red dot, then the 3.4x, then the ACOG, then the longer rifle scopes.
|
Actually, iron sights in BF3 have no advantage over red dots at all. Both have exactly the same ADS speed and zoom functions. Using iron sights in BF3 is more or less playing with a handicap.
Which is a crying shame, because using iron sights requires a lot of skill on the user's part and they should be rewarded.
Real life iron sights are actually horrendous. You have to think, it's engineers that build these things, not soldiers.
^Famas in BF3 has the exact same sights. It's a freaking brick with a hole in it.
Which is why holographic sights are so freaking superior:
You're right, those sights are terrible. I think if they're going for the "military machine" thing they should make it look like an M16 sight.
You should have an advantage for using iron sights. I think making iron sights quicker than even reflex sights would balance things out really well. Every attachment should have a trade off. Laser sight makes you visible, underbarrel attachments increase recoil, etc.