Cycler Iron Sights

**Malorn** · 2012-06-07, 02:08 AM

I'm highly forgiving on gameplay observations for the demo because well, it's a demo and likely has a lot of demo-specific gameplay aspects. However, art and models is something that I will comment on.

Cycler Ironsights.

To see this in action, go to 5:30 at the Day 1 stream, part 3. Here's the still.

I get how they want to make the TR seem like a more modern/conventional military, but come on, these ironsights are TERRIBLE. The Gauss and Pulsar had good ironsights. The cycler's irons are in competition with Battlefield's AN-94 for most terrible irons ever. And I think the Cycler wins the competition handily.

The purpose of aperture sights (the kind of sights they gave the Cycler) in the real world is for precision. I expect the TR to care less about precision and a lot more about quick acquisition before they spray the target with lead.

If you want to give the Cycler more classic aperture irons because the TR are more conventional, then give them ghost rings like the Repeater. Repeater looked good, please make the cycler the same way. At the very least, give the cycler much better apertures than it currently has. It's absolutely horrid. Can't see the target at all, especially with the recoil. Easy to lose the target in the irons graphic.

For comparison, here are the Gauss irons.

Notice how the view is unobstructed and there's a clear image of the target? Give that to the cycler irons too please.

Here's the nice repeater irons. Clear target image and only mildly obstructive.

Also, minor nitpick, but in the customization UI you use the phrase "clip size", please change to "magazine size" or "capacity". Using the term "clip" is 1980's bad terminology. That's like saying "silencer" (correct term is "suppressor"). I want to ignore it, but every time I see it I cringe.

Razicator · 2012-06-07, 02:10 AM

Man I'd pick the NC irons over any other iron any day. Reminds me of the AK47 iron sights of CoD4, the best iron sights ever. Why handicap the TR to force precision, when precision is not what they're about at all?

Coreldan · 2012-06-07, 02:11 AM

I personally hate using peep sights both in games as well as real life. I am happy I am not TR for this very reason too. That said, most likely people will upgrade from iron sights fairly fast, but still, NC sights are superior

So, even as NC, I support redesigning them

That said, the detail in the first picture is realllllly nice.

And yes, PS2 doesnt seem to have a single clip using weapon (those exist), so please don't call them that, it makes the game look sloppy when it doesn't have the basic terminology right. You can't even use the "it's shorter than magazine" argument, cos "Mag" is shorter than "clip" and 10 times more correct.

**Malorn** · 2012-06-07, 02:12 AM

NC irons look fantastic. If the cycler had a fraction of that goodness I'd be happy. Hell I'd be happy if they just gave it ghost rings like the repeater.

Edit: and yes there are weapons that use stripper clips, but as pointed out, none are in planetside that we have seen. The term "capacity" is a good easy way to avoid bad terminology in any case. But if you you want to be more specific, "magazine" or "mag" is the correct term.

Crovus · 2012-06-07, 02:30 AM

I agree that it should be redesigned, but who will actually be using the stock sights?

Coreldan · 2012-06-07, 02:31 AM

Originally Posted by Malorn

Edit: and yes there are weapons that use stripper clips, but as pointed out, none are in planetside that we have seen. The term "capacity" is a good easy way to avoid bad terminology in any case. But if you you want to be more specific, "magazine" or "mag" is the correct term.

Well even those basically have a magazine inside the weapon and the stripper clips are just used to load em in there which can also be done "manually". What I usually use as an example in these discussions is the Garand, which is luckily a weapon known by everyone, so it's easy to understand the difference.

But yes, change it!

I also complain about this exact same thing in every game I see it on. Sadly I watch PS2 videos at quite low quality cos I have a 1mbit connection so I cant spot these things on vids

Just to help SOE!

SKYeXile · 2012-06-07, 02:40 AM

Originally Posted by Crovus

I agree that it should be redesigned, but who will actually be using the stock sights?

exactly, since they have a dedicated sights slot you're not trading sights for a silencer or grip, you can put a sight in that spot...and thats it...so put a sight there.

Coreldan · 2012-06-07, 02:46 AM

Everyone will still be sporting ironsights for a while. And even if that while is quite short, I dont think it's a good reason to have them badly designed. It's one of the things new players will see very first.

My first weapon "mod" will certainly be a reflex sight'ish/holo mod.

Razicator · 2012-06-07, 02:50 AM

Originally Posted by SKYeXile

exactly, since they have a dedicated sights slot you're not trading sights for a silencer or grip, you can put a sight in that spot...and thats it...so put a sight there.

If we have good sights, we can spend our certs on upgrades on the plethora of other upgradeable slots. Plenty of people went with the stock AK47 sights in CoD, though admittedly you can only have so many mods at a time. Multiply the certs needed to unlock sights times the dozens of guns you are using, and I'd rather use certs on damage/accuracy/capacity while using the NC sights.

Redshift · 2012-06-07, 03:03 AM

Originally Posted by SKYeXile

exactly, since they have a dedicated sights slot you're not trading sights for a silencer or grip, you can put a sight in that spot...and thats it...so put a sight there.

Whilst that's true, it's still not really fair to give one side utter shite as default equipment.

You've also got to think that those guns are what people will be choosing teams by. It's ok for us we know what team to role, but the many thousands of new people are gonna role a char run around for 5 mins on each and then pick a team.

**Malorn** · 2012-06-07, 03:04 AM

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.

If PS takes a similar approach where irons are the fastest aim time (and in return you don't get any zoom and have to 'deal' with the graphic of the irons), then it absolutely matters.

Cycler irons are god awful; Gauss irons are great. From what I saw of the Pulsar that one looked good too. The Cycler stood out as being downright unusable and a mandatory optic upgrade, thereby foregoing any irons benefit that might exist (or be added).

chipshop · 2012-06-07, 03:11 AM

Originally Posted by Crovus

I agree that it should be redesigned, but who will actually be using the stock sights?

i'll always use ironsights. i hate addin stuff on - i feel more...attached to my gun that way.

Knightwyvern · 2012-06-07, 03:52 AM

Yea when I saw that peep sight on the stream I literally winced and said "ouch." On a CQC weapon I'd rather adjust the elevation on it and just sight over the top. Horizontal (and to a lesser extent, vertical) view in a sight picture is the most important thing in a setup, real life or video game. Using that TR sight as is would be suicide unless you're plinking away at a few hundred meters.

Antivide · 2012-06-07, 03:56 AM

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.

ProfessorCrow · 2012-06-07, 05:03 AM

Originally Posted by Malorn

Also, minor nitpick, but in the customization UI you use the phrase "clip size", please change to "magazine size" or "capacity". Using the term "clip" is 1980's bad terminology. That's like saying "silencer" (correct term is "suppressor"). I want to ignore it, but every time I see it I cringe.

Thisthisthis Ohman ohgod this. Even when used correctly, I cringe at the word "clip" just because it's used incorrectly so often that my jimmies get prematurely rustled. It's a simple fix, PS2, and you'll have the respect and admiration of gun nuts/military gamers everywhere.

-CroW