Posts by sqroot

    And thats exactly what it is right now already. There’s is even a graphic on how hitboxes got modified in an older patch.

    It doesn´t really feel that way to be honest, 90% im one shotted although i have full life, i totally can understand these claims ^^

    This isn't too far off if you're playing against someone that doesn't have terrible aim. Here's my DSR accuracy stats (~10k kills), adding to about 80% full-life oneshot potential (even disregarding the stomach):


    I did talk to the person who did the advertising. He said "bad phrasing, my bad, next time I'll do better" and left it there. Still, kinda doubt the support would change anything.

    Well there is federal trade commission for the usa to investigate their intentions of “bad phrasing”

    Let's not go overboard here. While it sucks that they didn't change the phrasing when told that it is missleading or that they had items in the loot boxes that don't even exist (probably by accident), this is nowhere near a case for the federal trade commission.

    I find the general loot box affair to be way worse.

    There's so many fair and decent monitization models that were very successful for free games in the past; instead they chose one that promotes gambling with rates that are so unbelievably unfair that one would have to pay 1300$ to get the skin they want (all without knowing that it is this unlikely because the game doesn't mention the rates anywhere!) and that *only* works for them because it exploits people that buy these lootboxes, thinking that they actually have a reasonable chance at getting the weapon they want.

    I have no reason to believe that this utterly broken and abusive system will improve any time soon.

    You do what every other game with snipers does and modify the hit boxes so 1 hit kills are in the upper chest and head only. Limb and Center of mass shots should be a 2 shot kill. It's pretty simple.

    Then it's definitely not working like that, because I've watched kill cams of DSR's an R93's getting 1 shot kills with legs and arm shots.

    Clearly their hit reg can't even figure out where you're shooting then if the hit boxes are assigned to work like that.

    According to the Cruise update, the DSR-1 oneshots on the entirety of the torso, the blaser only oneshots on the upper chest.

    Two things: I don't think making the DSR only oneshot on the upper torso will really nerf it considerably, you'll just get more random tags, considering that arm hits in front of the body don't also count towards the body damage.

    If you read the linked thread, the biggest issue with snipers that people made out is that holding an angle, prescoping, shooting, and un-peeking is a bit too effective. Two solutions were proposed: Nerfing the RPM so that it is easier for groups of players to overpower a sniper, and introduce better wall penetration, which would allow you to pressure snipers even when un-peeked.

    Why is it worth 500 chips? How is that value calculated/justified?

    I’m pretty sure it’s the amount you get after drawing a duplicate.

    However, this is not related to this thread in any way.

    Thanks. I've drawn an orange duplicate before but I didn't write down the chip amount to confirm that this is true.

    As for relevance; neither is the original comment you replied to, nor your reply to that comment.

    Do I look like I give a shight about what department deals with what. Just hand out what is owed to the testers, I have lost intrest in the game so this isn't for my benifit. The game is dead for now so I wish you luck in building a higher player base, but I doubt this will happen now. Only 2 servers in the EU what sort of JEW trick is this.

    Not surprised that you're resorting to anti-semitic comments, you complete and utter tool.

    How do you nerf the snipers without making them useless? (Tip: We've already had a long discussion about this here and it's very unlikely that you'll make any points that haven't already been made in the linked thread)

    This is really disappointing, and those chips shouldn't even be in the box. It's only 30 chips, which is likely to have > 50% chance of getting considering the droprates of most boxes. with that you can only get another lootbox(with an even worser droprate), or some dumb charm slot.

    Now, I have an even more reason to not to spend any money on these "scamboxes" $45 is 3670tk in my country. I'm not spending that much on digital stuff that doesn't even look that good for the price and lets not forget that you very likely spent $45 on 30 chips.

    Hell, even mobile games like standoff 2 has better skins and microtransaction handling than this and while some of them look similar to CSGO skins, the ones are not are still far better.

    It's likely to be way more than 50%, considering how relatively cheap the box is.

    The funny thing is that some of these weapons are effectively *only* attainable through these special sales. Compare the 45$ with the expected value of ~1300$ (21000 chips) for a single *specific* skin as calculated here: Price of items in Brazil

    EDIT: I think you also confused some stuff. The easter egg loot boxes are way cheaper than 45$ - you're thinking about the "packs", which actually guarantee you a weapon.

    I agree. While they're not explicitly stating that you're guaranteed a random skin, "Open the egg and win one x" isn't exactly suggesting that there's only a chance to win one x either.

    There's no mention of the rates anywhere either, which I think is especially scummy (the same goes for in-game lootboxes!)

    Some weapons mentioned in these loot boxes aren't even in the game, I think, like the City DSR-1. How does garbage like this even happen?


    You typically don't use logs when storing data like PTS reward progress, but databases.

    Logs (both structured and unstructured) are typically append+read-only and don't allow you to update a specific data set.

    I always thought higher RoF gun is better if u miss a shot than a lower RoF gun. Compare both a semi auto hipfiring SR to a full auto hipfiring smg and both have the same hipfire accuracy. For sr ur hoping for the one shot but if u miss the smg has a higher chance to kill u in that shot interval. Both can have the same ttk but smg has better shot recovery due to RoF

    Yes, if there is a huge difference in RPM, there's also a huge difference in TTK variation when shots are (completely) missed.

    There are still recoil parameters that differ between guns, despite randomness, though.

    SCAR recoil isn't just easier to control because it has less RPM, but also because the parameters result in a recoil that is easier to control. Calling it a pattern would be too generous, but it's not like every gun is using the same probability distribution for recoil.

    The main point that was made about inconsistency was about TTK inconsistency, and there's no denying that you will not always hit the upper torso due to all the aforementioned factors in the game, no matter how consistent your aim is. So in some sense, it is justified to call the SA58 inconsistent.

    Are you sure that each of the K2C patterns is fully deterministic?

    I'd also like to add that there is no "iron sight sniping" in this game, since from your post it sounds like you're referring to BF1, where sniping without a scope is possible. This is not possible in Ironsight, despite its name.

    In fact, "Ironsight" would be more appropriately named "Clear sight", since the ironsights on most guns suck and the smoke + muzzle flash + recoil make it way harder to use than the clear sight, which most people use.

    I have a topic to discuss about the AK12.

    While it's completely inferior to the AK47, I would like to test its accuracy and recoil recovery rate. In my end, I think the AK12 recovers faster than the AK12, but I'm not sure if thats just me, so I would like someone to test it as well, if it isn't too much to ask.

    The reason for this is only to check whether it's a better gun to use in a burst-fire manner than in automatic compared to its counterparts (I'm leaning on "no" but still worth a test)

    I can't help you test, but I also feel like the AK12 recoil is better than that of the AK47, which doesn't make up for the lack in DPS for me, though, since there's many guns with very good (or better) recoil and better DPS.

    The slightly higher RPM don't make a giant difference in terms of TTK variation. With 4 shots to kill you need 0.4s to kill with the SA58, while you need 0.3s to kill with 3 shots, resulting in a TTK variation of 0.1s, with you often needing 4 shots to kill someone (I'd check my own accuracy stats to calculate the expected value for you, but I'm not home).

    With the Scar, you need 0.44s to kill with 4 shots and 0.33s with 3 shots, resulting in a TTK variation of 0.11s with you usually only needing 3 shots to kill someone.

    Your quadra clip is utterly irrelevant, but you probably know that.

    Personally, I'm just suggesting to bump the ammo of the SA58 to 25 to compensate for the TTK variation - it's fine in its niche in other regards.

    I don't understand how that would result in the SA58 being stronger than all the other guns in the game or how that would remove it from its niche as you keep asserting, care to elaborate on that?

    Why is high RPM needed in close quarters? For hipfire? My view on hipfire is that most decent people I've played with avoid it anyways, because the ADS time on most guns is very low and you usually don't really gain anything from it, except for faster movement, which is often not that useful due to the low TTK and the rather high average sum of pings.

    I agree with your last point - both balance and variety are important, but honestly, Ironsight already has too many guns for there to be lots of significant variety between the guns. There's many pairs of guns that are very similar, and the niche of the SA58 isn't very pronounced either, which is why people are suggesting to buff it so that it's a more viable choice compared to the guns that are very similar to the SA58.

    How is it inconsistent? It's almost the same as the Scar. Literally the only diffrence is that the SA has more ROF whilst having 2dmg points lower.

    Infact, just go read this instead of claiming random stuff. CLICK ME DADDY

    Having diffrent guns brings a variety to the table. You guys just try to make every gun the same, cause !ATTENTION ASSUMING BIG TIME! you aren't able to handle fluff unless its name is AR-57 or P90 with a 50mag bullet hipfiring everyone from 100m afar.

    You should read your own sources.

    With the SA58, let's assume you hit the upper torso twice and the lower torso once. That's 2*34 + ⌊0.9*34⌋ = 98 damage, meaning that if you miss the upper torso once, you'll have a 4-hit kill, which leads to huge TTK variation, because you will usually not always hit the upper torso due to the aforementioned reasons.

    With the SCAR, you can miss two upper torso shots, and still oneshot, since 36 + 2*⌊0.9*36⌋ = 100 damage.

    Nobody's trying to make every gun the same, and I think that the SA58 is probably mostly fine as it is. No idea where you pulled the rest of the stuff in your post from.

    Isn't the recovery time at least 10 seconds to fully heal up?

    In my opinion, if you can't kill the sniper within 10 seconds, that's on you.

    Higher recovery times also imply more deaths you can't avoid in game modes like TDM, making the game even more of an uphill battle than before.

    I didn't mean the time it takes to regain health. I meant how easy it can be to get your sights on an enemy after being hit. I think that if one gets a hit in the head the screen should shake more which would make it harder to shoot back accurately. It has happened several times that I've hit a sniper once or twice from a long distance with the Aug and he has immediately killed me with a single shot.

    Ah, you're referring to kickback. Are you using softpoint?

    As someone who snipes a lot, I find it pretty hard to hit people when they consistently hit me with soft point, however I can still hit people if the person in question isn't using soft point. It makes a huge difference.

    Isn't the recovery time at least 10 seconds to fully heal up?

    In my opinion, if you can't kill the sniper within 10 seconds, that's on you.

    Higher recovery times also imply more deaths you can't avoid in game modes like TDM, making the game even more of an uphill battle than before.

    They're not kind of even because you will not always hit the upper torso. The main disadvantage of the SA58 is that the TTK is much more inconsistent than that of the Scar, while obviously having the advantage of a higher max TTK.

    I suppose most people avoid the SA58 because it only needs a single hit that misses the top torso to turn it into a 4shot kill, and there are obviously way better guns in that department. TTK inconsistency is a huge deal, especially because it results in higher ammo use, since you'll wait until you see the kill instead of stopping to fire after 3 hits.

    As for "you're just bad, just hit all your shots 4Head", I am very suspicious of people that claim they consistently hit the upper torso with all the janky animations, kickback and recoil, but feel free to prove me wrong with a screenshot of your accuracy stats.

    Yeah, Titan is great. The only map where I feel like I can pretty much play any weapon class and have my way.

    I don't have a big problem with prone campers. Sure, they kill me the first time I meet them but then I know exactly where they are so after respawning I can kill them quickly.

    Unless you're playing SnD. Or the people that killed you aren't super stupid and will move after killing you.

    As far as I know, development hasn't stopped. But the implementation of the things that have been developed has.

    I assume that this is because adding more features before you have a solid core makes optimisation and QA much more complicated.

    We'll see, I guess. If you're correct, we should see a flood of new content after the netcode update.

    EDIT: Which I doubt, though. There is no reason why even a complete re-implementation of the netcode should take this long.

    Never had performance issues or netcode. Never saw hit delays or netcode eating my shots. The change could be 2.0 version which overhauled the gameplay.

    Actually come to think of it netcode wasnt that perfect either. Sometimes i get shot before a second of seeing the enemy BUT its not as bad as ironsight cough desyncs

    Netcode in GITSFA was definitely better than in Ironsight. I did get shot after hiding behind cover every now and then, but not as bad as Ironsight. Overall, the netcode was not bad for me, but many people did complain how sometimes people that should be dead end up alive and they end up dead instead. And if enough people complained about it and then Nexon to make a PTS client for netcode testing, then it must've been a serious issue.

    But the game shut down due to lack of communication - even though they had PTS phases, there were moderators, community managers and weekly streams, the main issues with the game probably never reached the devs' ears. Either that or Nexon just said "screw it, milk this game for whatever it's worth and shut it down"... or a little bit of both.

    Now the same things are happening to Ironsight. If the developers truly cared about the game and the players' opinion on it, how come they don't have one of their guys lurking the forums, even using Google Translate to try and understand the issues even if they aren't good at English. I feel like everyone involved with Ironsight is following the principle of "Do what you're told and let whatever is bound to happen - happen."

    As for netcode: I'm sceptical about statements on netcode by normal players. You'll find a huge crowd of people that claim that the netcode sucks for any FPS game you pick. As it turns out, netcode will not magically undo latency, and thus things like either having to lead your enemies or getting shot after running behind a wall will always be an issue.

    The communication in Ironsight sucks, I agree. At least monthly or even bi-monthly updates on the development progress as opposed to a few announcements every 4 months on what will be released "soon" would be nice. I understand that super frequent updates and developer blogs are a hassle (afaik this greatly affected Rust development when they had weekly devblogs, for instance), but a proper progress update every month or every two months would be neat. All this is of course assuming that the game is still being developed.

    Supposedly the forum moderation team is forwarding valuable suggestions to the dev team. I doubt the actual discussions we're having here matter at all though, since I can't imagine that the moderators will summarize the arguments we make.

    The thing is that there is a whole queue of things the developers have already produced, the implementation of which have been held up by the need to optimise the netcode. The netcode wasn't an issue for the Korean version of the game, AFAIAA, because the net infrastructure was well suited to TCP.

    So it's not so much that they aren't producing content, they've already produced it. They just haven't implemented it because they need to fix the netcode as a priority.

    Why would all development need to halt for optimising the netcode?

    However, rules on this existed before GDPR and majority of games also have the same practice.

    So I can conclude that the reason for this is neither the risk of a GDPR violation, nor the cost of implementing procedures to ensure GDPR compliance? What is the reason then?

    I am also suspicious of the statement that the majority of games follow the same practice, because the majority of games allow you to read your own chats with people at a later point in time, even after shutting down the client, uninstalling, wiping client state and reinstalling, which obviously implies that the chat state needs to be stored somewhere on the server-side.

    I would disagree with the assumptions here, from my own experience as a player, from my observations in the communities I'm in and more importantly, following my communications with fellow industry members from other companies.

    People show disrupting behavior in other games (published in EU or otherwise).

    But then they get reported and they get a punishment for it.

    I suppose I wasn't clear enough in the statement you quoted. "Can enforce chat moderation" is not referring to the fact that these games have clean chats and that there's no toxicity, but that moderators have the ability to properly moderate chat, even after the match has ended. I was specifically referring to the act of moderation, not the end result of moderation, although I do admit that motivating my post by criticizing the end result must have been a bit confusing.

    In any case, this is exactly the issue: In other games, I don't need to take a screenshot of my own conversation, and there's a chance that people get banned even without me reporting them. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if many people reporting others for chat behaviour in Ironsight will assume that it works the same as in other games and not provide a screenshot, instead only outlining the situation and time it occured at.

    This is of course all given that they will take the time to navigate to the ticket formula at all, assuming that they know that it exists and where to find it, considering that there is no in-game report function anymore.

    There are certainly ways we can improve this (improving how reports are handled, how results are communicated) and this is indeed one of the topics that are pretty much always a work-in-progress.

    As mentioned, I'm in touch with fellow industry members regarding these topics and I try to keep an eye out on what processes and tools we can adapt to Ironsight. We do not have any immediate plans as we currently have more pressing issues to attend.

    This is good to hear, and I really hope that it's not just empty phrases to keep the community in check.

    Thanks for the replies! I am taking from this that it's not GDPR preventing this, but Gamigo, either because they are indeed not willing to pay the price of implementing the required procedures to ensure GDPR compliance, because they want to reduce the risk of a GDPR violation through data breach or because the Gamigo ToS is simply too restrictive for other reasons.

    I'm sure they will be closely monitoring the situation for signs of potential reputational damage and, if the signs are that people are being put off playing the game because of the levels of toxicity in the chat, then they will more than likely act at that point.

    While sensible in principle, I doubt this, because it isn't easy to measure whether people are put off by the toxicity in chat.

    Since the other thread was apparently off topic, I'm reopening the discussion here.

    As most people who play Ironsight know, chat can get pretty disgusting, with offenders seemingly never getting banned. Here's a few vile examples, with names redacted:

    It should be mentioned that I personally don't really care, but I'm sure that there are some that do and would rather not receive death threats.

    One would expect that there is a moderation team that occasionally glosses over chat logs and removes offenders from the game, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

    According to Solaria, this is due to GDPR, and Aeria Games doesn't store any chat logs.

    But why then do other chat services, especially in other games, resident in the EU, do fine?

    I'd love to know why other games and services can enforce chat moderation, but Aeria Games can't.

    Contrary to what the last post in the thread suggests, they didn't just assert that GDPR compliance is guaranteed (which I am not doubting), but also that GDPR compliance implies that no logs can be stored.

    Honestly, to me it seems like the reply in the aforementioned thread is extremely dishonest; it doesn't seem like GDPR is at fault at all, and Aeria Games is using the GDPR as a villian to justify their lack of chat moderation. Please consider that I am not saying that GDPR doesn't imply that more effort is required by the publisher to be able to store chat logs.

    If my observations are incorrect, please prove me wrong.

    Wew. Surely one could store chat messages in a way that's GDPR compliant?

    Are you sure that Aeria Games doesn't just want to make the effort of implementing the necessary mechanisms to be GDPR compliant?

    The only thing that would be possible is to save messages as just the text without any meta information. There would be no information about the user who wrote it. Just the plain message. And that doesn’t really help in situations like this.

    I read this article:

    Why is it that LiveChat seems to be able to store chat messages associated to a sender (enabling that people can choose to delete their own data, for instance)?

    I barely notice the acceleration in IS, compared to something like PUBG for example, where all of the movement feels terrible.

    Plus, I've never had a big problem with A-D spam, diving into prone or whatever. They're just another way to try and hit but not get hit.

    Yeah, but it's still there. I also agree that the PUBG movement sucks, but honestly, the Ironsight movement isn't super good either - except for being responsive, it lacks all depth.

    I wasn't trying to say that A-D spam is an issue in Ironsight, just that it would be one if there was no acceleration. Take Dirty Bomb as an example.

    The problem with A-D spam is that it isn't difficult to execute, doesn't require any kind of concious dodging of a shot and makes fights more random. Really not much you can do when tracking about someone instantly changing directions.

    I also don't think that prone is an issue in fights, it's just annoying when people use it to lie down in corners.

    Aeria Games doesn’t save messages sent via chat since this is not allowed due to the general data protection regulation.

    Wew. Surely one could store chat messages in a way that's GDPR compliant?

    Are you sure that Aeria Games doesn't just want to make the effort of implementing the necessary mechanisms to be GDPR compliant?


    I'll reply to some of your points simply because your post is a great basis for discussion.


    I'm not sure if Ironsight has an art style problem, so I don't really have an opinion on the matter.

    I know for sure that I hate some of the character models and that visibility can be a bit bad sometimes.

    However, I also dislike futuristic weapon models per se, I think I prefer the modern weapons in Ironsight.


    The same is true for most of Ironsight, hence why most good players use ARs instead of SMGs.

    Hipfire is still effective, but not as effective as ADS, at least for the majority of situations (you need to be really close for hipfire to be better than ADS).


    I absolutely agree, the attachments in Ironsight suck, even the sights suck.


    I think I'd even prefer higher health regen, at least for game modes that aren't SnD.

    The game feels like a constant uphill battle at times, with you not really being able to prevent your death after you encounter the third person in TDM, no matter how bad they are - possibly because of the (comparatively) low health regen, peeker's advantage, killstreaks and the fact that while hipfire may not be the most effective, it still deals damage.

    SnD is a different story, but I'm not super convinced that SnD can't work with high health regen, because there were titles where it worked well.

    The main argument I see for lacking health regen in SnD is that the lack of it enables a different set of strats where executing a strat is even sensible when you can't kill your enemy, but might just poke them a lot. It also means that faster run 'n gun strats become less effective. In SnD, this will result in a slower match pace, which may or may not be desirable.

    For other game modes, I don't see the appeal - there's not really any team work in any of those modes, there aren't really any strats and there's lots of people running around looking to poke you that don't really care about dying.

    Adding your point from later here as well:

    >Search and Destroy is a joke thanks to the Health regeneration mechanic in the game - you almost kill someone and die and he just heals up after 5 seconds, so you didn't even contribute to the teamplay as you taking 99% of his HP means nothing.

    You need to adapt your strats with health regen. SnD with health regen certainly works differently than SnD without health regen.

    Here's an example for SnD strats in a game that had heavy health regen and was also successful as a competitive game:

    For SnD pub matches, I think you have a point since there aren't really any common strats, just chaos. I don't enjoy pub SnD in general, though.


    Having played Dirty Bomb, I agree that skills (if not too powerful) can help with the uniqueness of your character.

    In Dirty Bomb, your character would also have a different amount of health depending on the character, which is something I disliked because it resulted in huge TTK variation.

    Skills would add more variation to Ironsight, but a lot of changes would need to be made to enable them - things like the low TTK mean that most skills are either extremely annoying or useless.

    I'm fine with the lack of them, to be honest - I don't think the added variation is super significant.


    Can't really comment whether GITS maps were better, but there's many maps in Ironsight that are pretty bad, I agree.


    Not sure about this one, but I feel like the core Ironsight gameplay is fine. Care to elaborate further?


    Game modes are definetly lacking in Ironsight, especially since most of the maps suck for some of them. Why would anyone think that Resource Takeover is a good idea?


    I also dislike prone the way it is in Ironsight, mostly because it makes checking angles very tedious.

    That being said, I think I could compromise with a version that doesn't allow you to shoot while in prone, only reload.


    Not sure what "The weapons were more viable" means. Relative to what?

    I don't think that there are any useless guns in Ironsight either. Some make trade-offs that you might deem not worth it (e.g. 40 mag size on the AK12 vs better TTK). What I find more annoying is that they all play so similarly - there's too many guns for too little variation in gameplay.


    The devs likely aren't lazy or incompetent (otherwise they would never have been able to release the game in the state it is!) - it's more likely that they're working on another project. Don't blame the devs, blame management for abandoning the game, if you're gonna blame someone.

    But even management might have their reasons. It's a fact that games generate less revenue as time goes on, and when publishers or developers see that the popularity of a game is dwindling, they need to start working on something else to ensure their livelihood and the growth of their company.

    For small developers and publishers, this is usually the case. On the other hand, when a company like EA abandons a game, it is because of pure greed - they could easily support the game, but they choose not to.


    Not sure if this is such a big deal.

    Now for the other number list:


    Trust me, I've played games that were way worse than that. You guys ever played BF2?

    For the most part, it happens rarely to me that I feel like my bullets just didn't hit despite the fact that they should have. I have a few such clips, though.

    As for the netcode, what do you take issue with exactly? Maybe I can comment on the current state of the netcode (PTS is more confusing to me).

    But Ironsight has movement acceleration as well! A bit of acceleration is sensible to weaken A/D spam.

    Acceleration and responsiveness aren't exclusive, take Quake or Tribes for instance.

    That being said, I also ended up with Ironsight because I disliked the choices most other games made. I'm still not happy with Ironsight, it's just the least shitty of the possible choices.

    sqroot here is the local white knight/ fanboy who will defend the game and troll everyone (like you) who disagrees, don't waste your time, there are a few more fanboys and they are all delusional thinking if they pretend the game isn't the garbage it is, it will actually get better... what a sad bunch of people.

    The game is fundamentally flawed in the fact that it became a COD clone, the fact that the gameplay did not deviate from that formula one bit, then there is the dumb netcode and the lack of content. When the netcode is fixed, it will begin to shine how empty and basic this game is - no content, dumb and shallow gameplay with people running around and hipfire-spraying with SMGs, prone spamming, retard-friendly recoil, HP regen....

    I could make a list with at least 20 bullet points about what I dislike about the game. In fact, I've even stopped playing because these things annoy me so much. I don't pretend that the steam release is gonna magically revive the game either and I've voiced concerns numerous times that the game isn't really being developed anymore, too. Please don't attack me for arguments I didn't make.

    I'm not gonna engage with you for on other points you're making because you sound an awful lot like that retard that suggested that Ironsight should really play like a CS clone and that everyone playing Ironsight because it is similar to CoD is wrong. I don't think having that discussion again is a good use of your or my time, so I'll just refer you to the other thread about this.

    A tip, though: If you want people to take your opinions seriously, it helps to constructively assert what to change and what the possible implications of that change are. Assuming that the devs care, game developers are flooded with a cesspool of arbitrary and unfounded opinions - if you can think of argument x, someone in the community will believe x and rally people behind them to support it. The mere fact that you support x doesn't matter to the developers, because they will also find loads of people that support "not x". What matters is the reasoning as to why you support x, how you would enforce x and the possible implications (both good and bad!) of the ways you outlined to enforce x. Ideally, you might even compare the implications of x to other arguments. This actually helps the developers make an informed decision, and will distinguish x from other arbitrary arguments where the players never spent a single minute thinking about any of these things, making their opinion nothing more than an arbitrary thought.

    Now, I don't think that the devs care in Ironsight, but I like arguing about FPS games in general, maybe to be able to contribute to one in the future.

    If you haven't noticed, I specifically attack people that do nothing but assert that x is true without properly outlining their reasoning, possible alternatives or the implications of their approach, even if I might agree with their opinion. To be more precise, I do part of the job for them and explain (often negative) implications of their approach. If that offends you, then so be it; but you should really have spent some more time thinking about and explaining your arguments beforehand if you don't want others to outline possible implications for you. Maybe you might even realize in advance that a thought you had wasn't sensible.

    I have nothing to contribute to this discussion, but I'd like to know about this RTS game sqroot mentioned.

    I love me some good ol' real time strategy

    Can't really post the project link without doxing myself, sorry. It was nothing super fancy like most of the RTS you see on Steam though, very barebones and simplistic - so you're likely not missing out on much.

    I made it with two friends when popped up (i.e. in 2015) and we were wondering whether we could build something more mechanically challenging as an RTS, but also very accessible (via our own small rendering engine built with WebGL) so that you can just jump in and play during breaks.

    The project is open source, but was never properly released because all of us moved to different cities, and while the core game was done, things like proper matchmaking still had to be implemented. Maybe I'll get around to fully finishing it some day by myself.

    I think the soft-point induced kickback is too much anyways. As suggested before by another thread on here, I'd be fine if it was removed.

    Well im sure the highlight runs in a similar way and its not perfect on replaying the highlight. Pretty sure the theater mode would be worse

    That should be improved as well. There's lots of unnecessary hackusations floating around due to inaccurate highlights.

    Jesus christ, you're so pretentious it hurts. You're pretending to be knowledgable about topics you're obviously inexperienced with. I still don't understand how the name of the type that is used to represent text matters here, but I find it to be more likely that you were just dropping names you missunderstood from your extremely limited knowledge about programming.

    A bit on my background to disprove your nonsensical accusations - I've been programming for seven years, with significant projects including an educational IDE for the lambda calculus, an indie RTS game, the ground station and the satellite implementation for an atmospheric satellite and a networking library that is now used in a popular cloud OS (CoreOS, it's not unlikely that you're running some of my code when using the internet ;)), having contributed to some important open source projects like the Purescript programming language or the Rust OxideMod (now uMod) project. Right now I'm pursuing research in formal verification and starting my thesis.

    As for my FPS skills, I'm sure most people here that have played with and against me can attest that I'm doing quite fine.

    I'm not gonna read the rest of your post because you're not worth my time. For you I hope that you eventually grow up and think back to this, cringing at your own stupidity when you were younger. If you don't, good luck in life - your kind needs it.